SpaceX's goal is to sell broadband internet service delivered by more than 1,000 small satellites. But industry experts say the company’s biggest challenge is financial. SpaceX must drive down the cost of sophisticated hardware and software to the point where it can deliver fast, reliable internet service at a price point that competes with cable or fiber-delivered broadband services, while finding enough underserved markets to provide scale.

SpaceX previously said its broadband coverage would be aimed at customers in the US and around the world, “including areas underserved or currently unserved by existing networks.” In mid-June, Chief Executive Elon Musk seemed to narrow the scope, telling shareholders of Tesla — Musk’s other high-wire venture — that the broadband plan’s main value was in providing internet access to “rural or semi-rural areas, places that don't have connectivity right now.” “It’s probably able to serve 3% to 5% of people in the world, but it’s actually not ideal for high-density cities,” Musk said. “It’s really to serve the unserved or poorly served.”

Facebook, Twitter, and Google defended their efforts to combat extremist content and misinformation online before the House Homeland Security Committee on June 26, but lawmakers walked away complaining that they aren’t satisfied with the tech giants’ efforts. “They’re going to have to do more,” said Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS), noting that he was dissatisfied with answers on a range of issues. Rep Max Rose (D-NY) offered some of the sharpest criticism, saying the tech firms are offering “technocratic” explanations while “people are being killed.” 

The hearing veered off track as the hours ticked on, with lawmakers raising concerns about a range of questionable content, including anti-vaccine misinformation and "deep fakes," or videos that have been altered to make it appear that people are saying things they never said. Most GOP lawmakers on the committee brought up concerns that the companies are biased against conservatives, a claim that the representatives flatly denied. And the conversation returned multiple times to the issue of freedom of speech and whether the companies should censor voices on their platforms.

A divided House passed an election security bill to strengthen the nation’s voting systems, with Democrats arguing that protecting the nation from another attack like the one Russia waged in 2016 was imperative. The bill passed 225-to-184, with Rep Brian Mast (R-FL) as the only Republican to join Democrats in backing the bill. While members of both parties have warned that the US voting system remains vulnerable to foreign interference, Democrats have been especially frustrated that Republican leaders have not been more focused on advancing election security legislation — particularly in the Senate, which has yet to hold votes on several measures to increase investments and impose new security and election reporting requirements. The legislation would authorize more than $600 million to spend on updating voting equipment to comply with new standards between now and 2020, including requirements that voting machines produce a paper record, stay disconnected from the Internet and be produced in the United States. But Republicans have objected to the legislation, arguing that its provisions the interfere with the authority of states and localities to conduct their own elections, Rep Jim Baird (R-IN) said. 

The Supreme Court on put on hold the Trump administration’s plan to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census form sent to every household, saying it had provided a “contrived” reason for wanting the information. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the splintered opinion. In a section agreed with by the court’s liberals, he said the Commerce Department must provide a clearer explanation. Agencies must offer “genuine justifications for important decisions, reasons that can be scrutinized by courts and the interested public,” Roberts wrote. “Accepting contrived reasons would defeat the purpose of the enterprise. If judicial review is to be more than an empty ritual, it must demand something better than the explanation offered for the action taken in this case.” Roberts said a district judge was right to send the issue back to the Commerce Department for a better explanation.