Social Media

The U.S. District Court of Utah granted NetChoice’s request for a preliminary injunction against the state’s Minor Protection in Social Media Act, which was set to go into effect in October. The injunction bars Utah from enforcing the law until NetChoice’s legal challenge is resolved (see 2407230034). The court “recognizes the State’s earnest desire to protect young people from the novel challenges associated with social media use,” said the ruling Tuesday from Judge Robert Shelby. “But owing to the First Amendment’s paramount place in our democratic system, even well-intentioned legislation that regulates speech based on content must satisfy a tremendously high level of constitutional scrutiny.” Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes (R) hasn’t, Shelby wrote. “Utah’s law not only violates the First Amendment, but if enforced would backfire and endanger the very people it’s meant to help,” NetChoice Litigation Center Director Chris Marchese said in a news release. This ruling is NetChoice’s sixth successful request for an injunction against a state social media law. “We look forward to seeing this law, and others like it, permanently struck down and online speech and privacy fully protected across the country,” Marchese said. Shelby said that the law was underinclusive in what companies and websites it applied to and that its provisions against autoplay didn’t appear to prevent the behavior it targeted. “Defendants do not offer any evidence that requiring social media companies to compel minors to push ‘play,’ hit ‘next,’ and log in for updates will meaningfully reduce the amount of time they spend on social media platforms,” Shelby wrote. “We’re disappointed in the district court’s decision preliminarily enjoining Utah’s Minor Protection in Social Media Act," a spokesperson for Reyes said. "The AG’s office is analyzing the ruling to determine next steps. We remain committed to protecting Utah’s youth from social media’s harmful effects.”

Despite numerous social media platform competitors, X has maintained its user base due to its personalized algorithms and people engaging with one another on the platform, Midia analyst Hanna Kahlert blogged Tuesday. However, that changed with X's recent ban in Brazil, as Bluesky has seen a surge in user downloads and usage, she said. It's unknown whether that translates into consistent, long-term usage. But with Bluesky also seeing growth in Portugal and other South American nations such as Chile and Argentina, it appears a competitor can finally draw users from X, she said.

Forty-two attorneys general supported U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy’s recommendation that social media carry warnings like the labels on cigarette packages. Murthy suggested last June that social media companies display warnings about mental health risks associated with their platforms (see 2406170059). The 42 bipartisan AGs, writing Monday under National Association of Attorneys General letterhead and representing states including California, New York and Indiana, supported the idea in a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate leaders Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “Young people are facing a mental health crisis, which is fueled in large part by social media,” wrote the AGs from 39 states, the District of Columbia, American Samoa and the U.S. Virgin Islands. “This generational harm demands immediate action. By mandating a surgeon general’s warning on algorithm-driven social media platforms, Congress can help abate this growing crisis and protect future generations of Americans.” New York AG Letitia James hopes “warning labels will be implemented swiftly to raise more awareness about this issue," the Democrat said in a news release Tuesday. Arkansas AG Tim Griffin (R) said, "A Surgeon General’s warning on social media platforms isn’t a cure-all, but it’s a step in the right direction toward keeping our kids safe in digital spaces.”

The FCC and other parties that Standard General and founder Soohyung Kim accuse of participating in a racist conspiracy to torpedo the company's $8.6 billion purchase of Tegna (see 2404250059) are urging dismissal of Standard's suit. Multiple defendants argued in motions to dismiss Monday that Standard's suit before the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia is in the wrong court. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in April denied a Standard/Tegna petition for writ of mandamus aimed at pushing the FCC to move on review and approval of the deal (see 2304210058).

The Congressional Research Service predicts the U.S. Supreme Court’s June Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo ruling (see 2406280043) and “uncertainty about the scope of the FCC’s authority and ability to adopt regulations in the public interest” could prompt congressional legislation "to clarify the agency’s statutory authority.” Conversely, lawmakers could also maintain “the status quo and let ambiguities regarding the FCC’s rulemaking authority be resolved by the courts,” CRS said in a Wednesday report. “There are also questions on whether the FCC may alter its rulemaking efforts in response to Loper Bright, as well as how such alterations might affect interest in legislation.” The FCC’s July FCC order that lets schools and libraries obtain E-rate support for off-premises Wi-Fi hot spots and wireless internet services (see 2407180024), April net neutrality rules and a 2023 digital discrimination order “illustrate the types of rules that might be challenged as exceeding FCC authority under Loper Bright or the major questions doctrine,” researchers said. Maurine and Matthew Molak petitioned the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week to review the E-rate Wi-Fi order (see 2408300027). The Molaks, whose 16-year-old son died by suicide after he was cyberbullied, say that ruling would give children and teenagers unsupervised social media access. Numerous FCC rules even before Loper Bright "were being contested by affected parties, including” the 5G Fund and next-generation 911 transition, “in both of which the FCC cites its public interest mandate,” CRS said. Researchers also noted the FCC’s 2022 notice of inquiry about ways to aid nascent in-space servicing, assembly and manufacturing companies (see 2208050023) “has come under scrutiny from interested parties.”

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 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.

New York should ban children from using cellphones during the school day, Gov. Kathy Hochul, D-N.Y., said Wednesday. New York is one of several states considering legislation and policies either restricting or banning children from using cellphones in school (see 2406070065). Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) signed an executive order in July that would implement restrictions by January. Legislators in Utah are considering a cellphone ban proposal, and California is advancing legislation (see 2408280033). Hochul during a Semafor livestream was asked if she thinks New York should implement a ban. “I personally do,” she said, noting she will be meeting with school union officials who support the proposal in the coming weeks. Hochul said she recognizes some parents are “anxious” about the prospect, especially if it could affect communication during a school shooting or crisis. If there’s a mass shooter, students should be following instructions from teachers and staff, not texting or recording the incident, said Hochul: Their attention should be on the adults who can bring them to safety. The purpose of school is to raise adults who can interact with each other and “make eye contact,” said Hochul. This generation isn’t communicating on a “human level” because of its dependency on cellphones throughout the day, she said: Students are supposed to be “paying attention and learning in school.” FTC Consumer Protection Director Samuel Levine said Hochul is correct that social media companies intentionally try to addict children. The agency welcomes states, both Democratic- and Republican-led, responding to this “real mental health crisis” for kids and teens, he said.

X permanently agreed to stop using personal data in public posts of EU and European Economic Area users to train its AI tool, Grok, the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) said Wednesday. Accordingly, the Irish High Court dismissed a proceeding against the social media site, the DPC said (see 2408080020). The regulator is now more generally "addressing issues arising from the use of personal data in AI models across industry" and asked the European Data Protection Board for an opinion under the EU general data protection regulation to "trigger discussion" on several core issues.

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr supported SpaceX CEO Elon Musk in online posts and remarks over the weekend, condemning the actions of a Brazilian judge against Musk’s X social media platform as part of a global movement toward censorship. Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes issued an order banning X Friday. “de Moreas’ own words make clear that he is attempting to strike a broader blow against free speech and in favor of authoritarian controls,” Carr wrote in a long X post on de Moraes’ opinion. “With X refusing to cave to secret and unlawful demands, you’re now seeing public and unlawful demands instead,” Carr wrote. He also reposted Musk's comments, condemning de Moraes as a dictator during an audio-only X Spaces stream. “This is part of a global movement where people believe that they can get away with what would otherwise be characterized as naked authoritarian actions, provided that they use the rubric of doing this to, quote, preserve democracy or save democracy,” Carr said. “If you are going particularly after the right type of political enemies, which happen right now, for whatever reason, to be sort of the populist right,” then “there's been a level of acceptance,” said Carr. “What is happening in Brazil that should be immediately and clearly rejected by the right, the left and the center, because once we erode these ideas of free speech and individual liberty every single one of us end up being harmed at the end of the day.” Carr has increasingly engaged with Musk on X (see 2408190040) in recent weeks (see 2408270048), visited SpaceX in August and posted a picture of himself and Musk together last week.

California state legislators approved privacy and social media bills before adjourning Saturday. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) will now consider signing the measures into law. On privacy, the Assembly voted 55-15 Saturday to concur with Senate amendments to AB-1008, which would clarify that personal information under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) can exist in different formats, including physical and digital. Meanwhile, the Senate voted 38-0 to concur with Senate changes to SB-1223, which would amend the CCPA to include “neural data” as a type of sensitive personal information. However, a bill on automated decision-making (AB-2930) stalled in the Senate. The legislature passed several bills about social media. The Assembly voted 58-0 to concur with Senate amendments to AB-2481, which would create a mechanism for people who report threatening content on social networks. The Senate voted 28-2 to finally pass SB-976, which would provide parental controls, including the ability to decide whether their children see a chronological news feed or one based on an algorithm, the current default. Senators unanimously concurred with the Assembly to pass SB-1283, which would require schools to adopt limits or bans on student use of smartphones in an effort to keep kids off social platforms when on campus. The legislature previously passed a similar Assembly (see 2408280033). And the Senate voted 36-0 to send the governor SB-1504, which would tighten a cyberbullying law that requires social platforms to have reporting mechanisms. However, the legislature failed to bring to a final vote AB-3172, which would have established civil penalties for a big social media platform that “breaches its responsibility of ordinary care and skill to a child” younger than 18. Lawmakers approved many other telecom and internet bills last week (see 2408300039).