Conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas argued again on Monday that his colleagues should really take a case that would give them the opportunity to narrow the scope of the technology’s preferred legal provision: Section 230.

While agreeing that the High Court should not take up a specific case involving Meta, Thomas nonetheless took the time to write: “We should, however, address the appropriate scope of immunity under Section 230 in a suitable case.”

This isn’t the first time that Thomas, who has made it clear that he’s among the tech-skeptical conservatives working in the US government, has hit out at Sec. 230.

The law helped build the modern internet by allowing platforms to avoid liability for the content users post. The companies say it balances free speech while allowing them to police their own services for the most objectionable content, but both sides of the political aisle are increasingly saying Sec. 230 allows platforms to ignore the evils of social media.

In particular, Republicans, who claim the platforms unfairly censor them, have sought to restrict the provision as a means of punishing social media companies. Thomas himself warned in 2020 of the “serious consequences” of courts interpreting immunity too broadly.

On Monday, Thomas returned to the issue, saying the “arguments for broad immunity” under the provision are not based on the text of the statute.

Moreover, on Monday, the Supreme Court decreases to hear a matter involving a shareholder trial against Google for undisclosed security vulnerabilities.