I’ve been fighting to repeal Section 230... The PROTECT Act aims to repeal Section 230, ending the legal shield that has long allowed Big Tech companies to avoid accountability for the harm they cause children.
Pursue legislation in Congress to repeal Section 230 and end the legal shield for Big Tech companies.
Occurrences
Congressman Patronis is fighting to repeal Section 230 in Congress.
Evidence
The official Patronis House homepage's Latest News section showed its most recent posted items dated May 22, 2026 about the Firearm Freedom Act, transportation funding, and veterans funding; no Section 230 or Big Tech repeal item appeared in the June 9-11, 2026 lookback window.
On the current official House homepage snapshot for Jimmy Patronis, the latest news items are dated May 22, 2026 and May 15, 2026 and cover the Firearm Freedom Act and a MilCon-VA appropriations vote. The page does not show any Section 230 repeal bill, Big Tech liability-shield measure, or other concrete action on this promise in the lookback window.
The official PROTECT Act FAQ says H.R. 7045 was introduced by Congressman Jimmy Patronis and would eliminate Section 230 and its platform-moderation protections.
The June 8, 2026 press-release listing says Patronis will host a town hall on AI chatbots and the fight to repeal Section 230, and states that he is fighting to repeal Section 230 in Congress.
Assessments
The promise was to pursue repeal legislation in Congress, not necessarily to secure repeal itself. Official House materials indicate Patronis introduced H.R. 7045, described as eliminating Section 230 and its platform-moderation protections, and his June 8, 2026 press materials say he is fighting to repeal Section 230 in Congress. That constitutes concrete legislative pursuit during his current federal term, so the promise is best scored as delivered in the same term.
This promise is about taking congressional action, not necessarily achieving final repeal. Jimmy Patronis has been in the U.S. House since April 2, 2025, so the relevant question is whether he has introduced, co-sponsored, or otherwise materially advanced Section 230 repeal legislation during this federal term. The evidence provided shows no such action on his official House site and no concrete Section 230 or Big Tech liability-shield effort in the available lookback window. But that evidence is not a complete legislative record, so it does not prove he never pursued the promise. With no verified bill sponsorship or other material action, full delivery is not supported; with no comprehensive record disproving all action, the safest judgment is unresolved.
The available evidence from Patronis's official House site shows recent unrelated legislative activity but no concrete Section 230 repeal bill, sponsorship, or other visible effort in the lookback window. That is not enough to confirm the promise was fulfilled or seriously advanced, so the claim remains unresolved.