Elon Musk's X sues New York to block social media hate speech law
Elon Musk's X Corp has sued New York State Attorney General Letitia James, challenging a law in the US state that requires social media companies to disclose how they monitor hate speech, extremism, and other content.
The complaint, filed on Tuesday in a Manhattan federal court, argues that the law forces companies to disclose 'highly sensitive and controversial speech' that is protected under the United States Constitution's First Amendment, but disfavoured by the state.
Passed in December 2024, the law requires social media companies to clearly explain their terms of service to users and submit reports on those terms to the attorney general.
'We are taking bold action to hold companies accountable, strengthen protections, and give consumers the transparency and security they need and deserve,' New York Governor Kathy Hochul said at the time.
X Corp is seeking a court order to block enforcement of the law, known as the Stop Hiding Hate Act.
Deciding what content is acceptable on social media platforms 'engenders considerable debate among reasonable people about where to draw the correct proverbial line', X said, adding 'this is not a role that the government may play'.
The complaint also quoted a letter from two legislators who sponsored the law, which said X and Musk in particular had a 'disturbing record' on content moderation 'that threatens the foundations of our democracy'.
New York's law requires social media companies to disclose steps they take to eliminate hate on their platforms, and to report their progress. Civil fines could reach $15,000 per violation per day.
The law was written by state Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assembly Member Grace Lee, both Democrats, with help from the Anti-Defamation League.
X said that New York based its law on a nearly identical 2023 California law whose enforcement was partially blocked by a federal appeals court last September because of free speech concerns.
California agreed in a February settlement with X not to enforce the law's disclosure requirements.
This marks the latest in a series of lawsuits by the company targeting US states over free speech concerns. In April, X sued the state of Minnesota over a law banning deepfakes intended to harm political candidates or influence elections.
Musk has long described himself as a free speech absolutist, yet he has also been criticised for censoring political voices he disagrees with. As Al Jazeera reported ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Musk, then a vocal supporter of Donald Trump, regularly suppressed Democratic voices and suspended several accounts on X that were critical of Trump or of Musk's views.
The platform has also faced ongoing accusations of fostering hate speech under Musk's leadership. In 2023, the Center for Countering Digital Hate found that X failed to act on 99 percent of hate-filled content posted by users subscribed to Twitter Blue, the company's premium service.
Reports by watchdog groups, including Media Matters, eventually led several major brands to pause advertising on the platform, which prompted X to file lawsuits in response.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
2 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
NATO chief denies being hypocritical over US strikes on Iran
NATO chief denies being hypocritical over US strikes on Iran NewsFeed 'I don't agree with that assessment at all.' Responding to Al Jazeera's James Bays, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte denied that the military alliance is acting hypocritically by not criticising the US for its actions in the Middle East. Video Duration 03 minutes 10 seconds 03:10 Video Duration 01 minutes 02 seconds 01:02 Video Duration 01 minutes 10 seconds 01:10 Video Duration 01 minutes 02 seconds 01:02 Video Duration 01 minutes 42 seconds 01:42 Video Duration 00 minutes 23 seconds 00:23 Video Duration 00 minutes 21 seconds 00:21
Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Trump claims ‘bullseye' after pictures of Iran's nuclear sites emerge
Trump claims 'bullseye' after pictures of Iran's nuclear sites emerge NewsFeed US President Donald Trump has said the images showing the aftermath of Iran's nuclear sites following the US attack reveal the operation was 'spectacularly successful'. Video Duration 01 minutes 10 seconds 01:10 Video Duration 01 minutes 02 seconds 01:02 Video Duration 01 minutes 42 seconds 01:42 Video Duration 00 minutes 23 seconds 00:23 Video Duration 00 minutes 21 seconds 00:21 Video Duration 00 minutes 55 seconds 00:55 Video Duration 01 minutes 04 seconds 01:04
Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Sounds familiar: Was this said about Iraq in 2003, or Iran in 2025?
'Today, we have the greater power to free a nation by breaking a dangerous and aggressive regime. With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians.' That may sound like something said yesterday, following US strikes on Iran. But it wasn't. Those words were delivered by United States President George W Bush on board the USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1, 2003, as he marked the end of major combat operations in Iraq. Now, with Israel and the US engaged in an escalating conflict with Iran, world leaders are using language and rhetoric that sound all too familiar, drawing eerie comparisons to the lead-up to the Iraq war more than two decades ago. Familiar warnings, similar justifications Israel and the US have claimed their military strikes are aimed at preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Iran, for its part, insists its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful and meant solely for civilian purposes. For more than three decades, a familiar refrain has echoed from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons. In 2002, he urged the US Congress to invade Iraq, claiming Baghdad was developing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). He also claimed Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons. The US invaded Iraq in 2003, but no WMDs were found. The latest surge in inflammatory rhetoric from American and Israeli officials goes beyond Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions and missile capabilities. Increasingly, it hints at the possibility of regime change, a direction the US has a long and controversial history of pursuing in the region. History repeating? The war led by the US and its 'coalition of the willing' left Iraq in ruins, with hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed, about 4,500 American soldiers dead, and the country destabilised by deepening sectarian conflict. Looking back, the rhetoric that paved the way for that invasion seems unsettlingly familiar. The US, along with the United Kingdom, tried to convince the world that Iraq had WMDs as the war progressed. How well can you tell the difference? Read these 10 statements and decide: were they made in the lead-up to the 2003 war or in 2025?
