9th Circuit Deals Setback to Calif. Social Media Transparency Law
Agreeing with X’s First Amendment arguments, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals supported blocking a California law requiring social media companies to provide the state with semiannual disclosures of their content-moderation policies. In a Wednesday opinion, the appeals court…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
reversed a U.S. District Court for Eastern California decision to deny X’s request for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of AB-587. The 9th Circuit remanded to the district court with instructions to enter a preliminary injunction against the reporting requirement and to determine if other challenged provisions should also be enjoined. X is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that the reporting requirement facially violates the First Amendment, found a 9th Circuit panel including Judges Milan Smith, Mark Bennett and Anthony Johnstone. The disclosure requirements “likely compel non-commercial speech and are subject to strict scrutiny, under which they do not survive,” Smith wrote (case 24-271). Because the court is reversing based on free-speech grounds, it needn’t address X's arguments that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act preempts the law, the judge said. X and California AG Rob Bonta (D) didn’t comment by our deadline.