Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
The Digital Integrity in Democracy Act amends Section 230 to carve out immunity for large social media platforms that intentionally or knowingly host objectively incorrect information about covered elections’ administration or voter eligibility. It requires a written-notice removal process with 48-hour (24-hour on election day) takedown deadlines after notification, creates a safe harbor for timely removals, and authorizes civil enforcement by the U.S. Attorney General, state officials, and aggrieved candidates with statutory damages of $50,000 per item plus injunctive relief.
Left emphasizes election protection; right emphasizes censorship risks
Substantive change to Section 230 and high political salience make floor passage contentious; narrower scope and compromise features could attract some cross-aisle support.
The Digital Integrity in Democracy Act amends Section 230 to carve out immunity for large social media platforms that intentionally or knowingly host objectively incorrect information about covered elections’ administration or voter eligibility.
It requires a written-notice removal process with 48-hour (24-hour on election day) takedown deadlines after notification, creates a safe harbor for timely removals, and authorizes civil enforcement by the U.S. Attorney General, state officials, and aggrieved candidates with statutory damages of $50,000 per item plus injunctive relief.
Modifies core internet-immunity law on a charged subject with significant litigation and industry opposition risk; limited scope helps but does not overcome major hurdles.
How solid the drafting looks.
Left emphasizes election protection; right emphasizes censorship risks
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left emphasizes election protection; right emphasizes censorship risks
Likely supportive overall because the bill targets election misinformation and holds big platforms accountable for harms to voting.
Will note benefits for protecting voters and election integrity, while flagging risks to due process, free expression, and possible vagueness in key definitions.
Cautious support for measures that protect election administration, paired with concern about vagueness, enforcement mechanics, and unintended consequences.
Would favor technical fixes and safeguards to limit overreach and ensure predictable implementation.
Likely opposed overall, viewing the bill as government intervention that risks censoring speech and imposing heavy liability on platforms.
Will emphasize free speech, administrative burden, and the risk of partisan enforcement.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modifies core internet-immunity law on a charged subject with significant litigation and industry opposition risk; limited scope helps but does not overcome major hurdles.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left emphasizes election protection; right emphasizes censorship risks
Modifies core internet-immunity law on a charged subject with significant litigation and industry opposition risk; limited scope helps but…
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Digital Integrity in Democracy Act.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.