This month a Florida lawmaker introduced the Stop Social Media Censorship Act, a bill designed to fine Big Tech companies for their mass censorship of conservatives and Christians.

Florida State Senator Joe Gruters introduced the bill last Friday in an attempt to stop the mass censorship of conservatives and Christians by hitting Big Tech giants in their pocketbook whenever censorship occurs.

According to the bill summary, it will prohibit “a social media company from using hate speech as a defense,” and authorize Florida’s “Attorney General to bring an action on behalf of a social media website user,” effectively ending Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube’s fallback censorship excuses of hate speech or violation of community standards.

Trending: Joe Biden Tells CNN That He May ‘Develop Some Disease and Say I Have to Resign’ to Give Presidency to Kamala Harris

The bill posits that social media companies have created a “digital public square,” and the state of Florida “has an interest in helping its citizens enjoy their free exercise of rights.”

If passed, any social media company with more than 75 million users will be fined a minimum of $75,000 for infringing on the freedom of speech of its users.

From the text of the bill:

58         (2)(a) The owner or operator of a social media website who
   59  contracts with a social media website user in this state is
   60  subject to a private right of action by such user if the social
   61  media website purposely:
   62         1. Deletes or censors the user’s religious speech or
   63  political speech; or
   64         2. Uses an algorithm to disfavor or censure the user’s
   65  religious speech or political speech.
   66         (b) A social media website user may be awarded all of the
   67  following damages under this section:
   68         1. A minimum of $75,000 in statutory damages per purposeful
   69  deletion or censoring of the social media website user’s speech.
   70         2. Actual damages.
   71         3. If aggravating factors are present, punitive damages.
   72         4. Other forms of equitable relief.
   73         (c) The prevailing party in a cause of action under this
   74  section may be awarded costs and reasonable attorney fees.
   75         (d) A social media website that restores from deletion or
   76  removes the censoring of a social media website user’s speech in
   77  a reasonable amount of time may use that fact to mitigate any
   78  damages.


It would also prevent social media companies from using nebulous definitions of hate speech from skirting these fines in a court of law, effectively ending Big Tech giants’ mass censorship.

This comes as Twitter’s head censor has been exposed as a radical left wing ideologue, and as journalist Tim Pool roundly demolished all censorship excuses during an appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast.