Single-voice party-framed proposal c/o "free speech online"
Digital Due Process and Platform Transparency Act
Drafted 2026.08.03 06:04 UTC · deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash
A note on this output
This is an archived single-party-framed SI proposal, machine-generated by software, not legislation. An editorial source review was not recorded for this proposal. For separately developed consensus drafts, visit the homepage marquee.
Proposal text
This Act requires large online platforms — defined as those with more than 50 million monthly active users in the United States — to publish clear, specific terms of service that define prohibited speech and conduct, and to apply those terms consistently and without viewpoint discrimination. When a platform removes user content or suspends an account, it must provide the user with a detailed written notice citing the specific policy violated, the factual basis for the action, and information about the appeals process. Platforms must establish a meaningful appeals mechanism that provides a human review within 30 days and a final written decision. Platforms must also disclose to users when algorithmic systems are used to amplify or suppress their content, including the general criteria for such decisions. The Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general may enforce these provisions through civil actions, with penalties for violations determined after a hearing where the government bears the burden of proving non-compliance. This Act does not preempt any state law that provides greater protections for user speech or due process on online platforms.
Constitutional grounding
This proposal stays within enumerated federal powers: it regulates interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) because the covered platforms are channels and instrumentalities of interstate commerce. It does not abridge the First Amendment; it imposes only content-neutral procedural requirements on platforms — notice, appeal, and transparency — without requiring or prohibiting any specific speech. It places the burden of justification on the government by requiring the FTC or state enforcers to prove violations in court, not on users to defend their speech. It prefers decentralization by expressly allowing states to adopt stricter protections, respecting the Tenth Amendment. It satisfies due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments by requiring notice and a meaningful hearing before a platform permanently deprives a user of access to their account or content, which constitute property interests under federal law.
Constitutional citations
- → Article I, Section 8, Clause 3
- → Amendment I
- → Amendment V
- → Amendment X
Generated under hard constitutional rules. Counterfactual reference, not real legislation. · ← Back to the Republic