Platform hate speech rules silently import U.S. antidiscrimination law categories

Evidence

In most instances, platform hate speech guidelines echo U.S. legal language, particularly the list of groups to which the rule applies. This is the most obvious place where legal language overtakes the otherwise casual tone of these guidelines. As in Twitter’s policy, most list the “protected classes,” those groups that enjoy protection from discrimination in U.S. law, developed over time as in a series of antidiscrimination statutes, from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which prohibits discrimination based on “race, color, religion, or national origin”), the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (sex), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (age), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (disability), and so forth. — Tarleton Gillespie, Custodians of the Internet, 189

Categorization

• QUESTION: Why did U.S. platforms adopt protected-class lists from domestic employment law to govern global speech, when most non-U.S. jurisdictions license narrower hate-speech prohibitions? A comparative regulatory question worth chasing.
• XREF: Connects to chapter 2 of this book on platforms claiming the Section 230 foreign/improbable legal category — again U.S. law exported globally through private codes.