Newsletter
Elon Musk’s X Corp. filed a lawsuit against the state of California, alleging that AB 587, a state bill, infringes upon X Corp.’s free speech rights. The bill compels companies to define murky terms.
In this lawsuit, X Corp. states that the bill violates federal and state free speech laws. It forces companies, like X Corp., to engage in speech against their will as they must establish definitions for politically-charged issues, such as hate speech and racism, as mandated by the bill.
Elon Musk’s X Corp.’s complaint highlights the difficulty in reliably defining terms like hate speech, misinformation, and political interference. These definitions often carry political bias due to the absence of a consensus within the public sphere, according to X Corp. The company argues that by defining these terms, it compels itself to take a position on them.
Elon Musk’s X Corp. more lawsuit details
The lawsuit further alleges that AB 587 aims to coerce social media companies into eliminating constitutionally-protected content that the state deems problematic. Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration promoted the bill as a pioneering social media transparency measure when he signed it into law in September last year. Laws regulating social media moderation have been enacted in both Texas and Florida, with pending legal challenges before the Supreme Court.
The challenge of social media moderation persists. X Corp. employs tools like automated systems and community flagging for moderation and fact-checking. Recently, the company introduced Community Notes for videos, allowing “Top Writers” to provide context for potentially misleading videos, though this feature also carries the risk of contributing to misinformation. Reddit faced criticism for replacing longtime moderators with potentially less experienced ones. Bluesky’s moderation manifesto even acknowledged that its approach might suppress fact-checking on the site.
In summary, X Corp.’s lawsuit against California’s AB 587 raises significant concerns about the impact of legislation on free speech rights and the complexities of moderating online content. These issues remain subjects of intense debate and legal scrutiny in various states.