U.S. judge denies Florida's request to dismiss suit over 2021 social media law
The lengthy suit over the 2021 state law punishing social media companies for deplatforming conservatives will continue, a U.S. judge ruled on May 22, 2025. (Photo by)
A federal judge has denied Florida's motion to dismiss a lawsuit against a 2021 law punishing social media platforms for alleged censorship of conservatives.
U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle of the Northern District of Florida issued an order Thursday denying the state's motions to toss the suit brought by two trade associations representing social media giants and to compel those companies to turn over information about their internal policies.
The order came weeks after Hinkle held a hearing in Tallahassee in which he said he's still perplexed about what the Legislature meant to accomplish by trying to limit social media content moderation. Hinkle wrote that neither the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit nor the U.S. Supreme Court had questioned the plaintiffs' standing to sue Florida.
NetChoice and co-plaintiff Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) argue that the law violates the First Amendment and is unconstitutionally vague. The two groups represent a number of the biggest social media companies, including Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, Apple, and Pinterest.
'Once again, a judge has confirmed the importance of the First Amendment, rejecting Florida's attempts to evade review of its unconstitutional statute,' wrote Stephanie Joyce, director of CCIA's Litigation Center, in a press release Thursday. 'This law tries to force websites to speak as the state commands, which strikes at the heart of free discourse and democracy. We now move forward with demonstrating why this law must be struck down.'
Hinkle is revisiting the case after the country's highest court punted it back to the Eleventh Circuit because the justices found that the appellate court had not conducted a proper analysis of the groups' First Amendment challenges, which in turn sent the case back to Hinkle.
The law the Legislature passed following then-former President Donald Trump's banishment from social media platforms after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol prohibits deplatforming any candidate for statewide political office. Additionally, SB 7072 granted the Florida Election Commission authority to fine platforms with gross revenues of more than $100 million or more than 100 million monthly users $250,000 per day for banning statewide candidates and $25,000 per day for candidates for other offices.
In his order Thursday, Hinkle wrote that provisions in the law, such as one banning platforms from placing candidates' posts or posts about them in a less prominent position, would give candidates a statutory right to flood users' feeds.
'The defendants have not attempted to explain what these provisions really mean or how they would be applied. Nor have the defendants offered any theory under which a state can preclude this kind of curating without violating the First Amendment,' Hinkle wrote.
Still, Hinkle, who originally issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law, leaned toward a belief that provisions of the law are unconstitutional as applied to some of the companies rather than considering the law unconstitutional on its face. He used that reasoning to deny the state's motion to force the plaintiffs to turn over more information about specific companies.
'The plaintiffs' facial challenge to SB 7072, and perhaps even to its various provisions viewed in isolation, is likely to fail — and the disputed discovery, if allowed, would almost surely make no difference,' Hinkle wrote.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
11 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Mass. considers scrapping religious exemptions for vaccinations
Advertisement In Massachusetts, parents can write a letter stating that a vaccine conflicts with their 'sincerely held religious belief' in order to exempt their children from vaccination requirements needed to enroll in public schools. State Rep. Andy Vargas and State Sen. Edward Kennedy both Advocates who oppose the exemptions say that religious exceptions are being misused by parents who are hesitant about vaccinating their children. Advertisement 'It's definitely a general pattern of people abusing the exemption, especially since But parents across the state came to Beacon Hill to testify in support of religious exemptions at a hearing of the Legislature's Joint Committee on Public Health. They said exemptions were essential to their first amendment right to practice their religion and to honor the concept of informed consent. 'I'm curious why diversity, equity and inclusion is not being applied to those with sincerely held religious beliefs,' Lisa Ottaviano said while testifying at the hearing. Some speakers at the hearing said they were uncomfortable with the components of certain vaccines. 'We should not be forced into violating our moral conscience by injecting products developed from aborted fetuses such as the MMR, the varicella vaccines,' said Nicholas Kottenstette, a Catholic father of four from Sterling, Massachusetts. Vaccines don't contain fetal cells, Others testifying against the bill said they wanted to protect religious exemptions because they felt that accountability measures for vaccine manufacturers were insufficient. 'I started meeting more people whose children had reactions to vaccines that were adverse, so I started doing my own research and learnt a lot of concerning things like how pharmaceutical companies have legal protection against being sued,' Maureen Trettel, a grandmother from Milford said. Advertisement Similar bills have been filed in previous sessions, so the debate over religious exemptions for vaccines in Massachusetts has been going on since at least 2019, well before the COVID-19 pandemic that made vaccines a polarizing issue. The elevation of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vaccine skeptic, to U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services has drawn even more interest to the issue. Last week, Kennedy Logan Beyer, an aspiring pediatrician pursuing an MD/PhD degree in public health at Harvard, spoke in favor of eliminating religious exemptions. While volunteering at a Special Olympics event, Beyer spoke to a parent who told her that she was worried that vaccines caused autism. The mother told Beyer that she was planning to apply for a religious exemption because she was unsure about vaccinating her children. 'She told me that her family 'didn't really go to church' but you don't have to prove anything to get the exemption,' Beyer said. Beyer said that this incident made her concerned about growing vaccine hesitancy and inspired her to testify. 'At the hearing, so many parents said they just want to do what's best for their children … I love that instinct,' Beyer said, 'But I know that passing policies that help facilitate more kids getting vaccinated is really what can keep children safe.' Advertisement Harrison, mother of cancer-survivor Miranda, also understands the instinct of parents on the other side of the issue, even if she disagrees with them. In addition to Miranda, Harrison has twin six-year old boys who both have autism. 'I can know the grief and shock that parents experience when they find out their kid has autism. I get it,' Harrison said. 'But vaccines are not to blame ... autism is a result of Around 16,000 children in Massachusetts are unvaccinated without claiming an exemption — a group that the state describes as 'noncompliant students' in its documents. Many parents in opposition to the bills questioned why the bills were trained just on the 2,000 students who did have religious exemptions. 'I'm curious why the Legislature is targeting the small percentage of children with religious exemptions and ignoring the huge gap population,' said Ottaviano testifying at the hearing. Advocates for the bills said the new provisions that mandate that all schools must report vaccination numbers to the state's department of public health would address these noncompliant students as well. 'That's what the data reporting is about, we want to make sure that schools have accurate records,' Blair of Massachusetts Families for Vaccines said. 'If there is a gap … they should reach out to those students to find out why the records are not on file.' Speakers in favor of the bills were focused on eliminating religious exemptions in order to protect children who cannot be vaccinated due to medical reasons like allergies or problems with their immune systems. 'It's actually those people … that we're really doing this for, because they're the ones who depend on herd immunity,' Blair said. Advertisement Angela Mathew can be reached at
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
Portland ICE building being restored after riot, protests
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – After two days of , the block appears to be clear Monday afternoon. Several protesters camping outside of the ICE facility were ordered to move, and they are now set up down the street. Second man involved in Clackamas Town Center parking lot shooting gets 70-month sentence Meanwhile, the building itself is in the process of being restored with protective boards and the graffiti is being power washed away. Tensions were high over the weekend, with hundreds of people protesting outside the ICE building on Saturday. That number dwindled down to around a few dozen on Sunday. Portland police declared the protests a riot on Saturday night, saying they were going to make targeted arrests. That night, ICE agents also threw several rounds of tear gas into the crowd. KOIN 6 News reporters observed some of the protesters tossing the canisters back at the building along with water bottles and other materials. Crews also saw ICE agents use paintballs, rubber bullets and pepper bullets against protesters. Stabbing suspect at large after victim seriously injured in SW Portland Damage to the ICE building includes graffiti, smashed windows and doors, and trash. One protester, Blue, told KOIN 6 News there are greater things at stake than building damage. 'People are going to exercise their First Amendment right how they choose,' Blue said. 'It's a building. It has no rights. It has no importance to me. Compared to the human lives that are at stake here.' 'People are choosing to be in a location that they're not supposed to be, it seems like the protest is that's kind of, to begin with, their only crime. And then the police come out and get violent and then it becomes something else,' added a protestor named Casey. over the course of the weekend, and some face felony charges. Four appeared in court Monday. 'I grieve that there's the violent, or more demonstrative, type of stuff missing. I'll just making that statement about why this is what we're about,' said protestor Wayne Smith. 'I think maintaining social order is the responsibility of the police.' Portland Mayor Keith Wilson with the following statement: 'An estimated 50,000 Portlanders marched together in solidarity and protest yesterday, joining demonstrations from across the nation. We celebrate all those who peacefully and powerfully raised their voices against Federal overreach, which are deeply held values in both Portland and our nation. Miles from the planned demonstration, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility was damaged by fireworks and other materials. The Incident Command team learned of one federal officer being injured and sent resources to assist, but learned he did not require medical treatment. Later in the evening, PPB was notified that two additional officers received minor injuries and they, too, did not require treatment. The Portland Police Bureau responded swiftly, arrested one person, and cleared a path for a medical evacuation, which was ultimately not required. Later in the evening, a small group of demonstrators remained at the facility and the majority were exercising their constitutional right to free speech while remaining law abiding. However, PPB did step in to make targeted arrests when they had probable cause of criminal behavior. Portland is a sanctuary city within a sanctuary state, and the Portland Police Bureau serves and protects our community. We affirm the right to free speech and expression while emphasizing that violence, destruction, and obstruction carry consequences. Portland complies with all applicable federal and state laws and will not obstruct lawful federal enforcement operations. Our officers will not be used as agents of ICE, but will intervene when criminal acts occur. Accordingly, our officers have maintained a presence at the facility during demonstrations. It is important to note that just because arrests are not made at the scene, when tensions are high, that does not mean that people are not being charged with crimes later. Even when arrests do not happen in the moment, PPB members will continue to conduct follow-up investigations, make arrests, and forward cases to the Multnomah County District Attorney for prosecution. Portland has not requested and does not require the intervention of the National Guard. Deploying military troops to the heart of an American city, as the administration has in Los Angeles, is an unwarranted, unprecedented, and unconstitutional action. If we witness federal abuse following this incident or any other pretext, we will bring it to light, take legal action, and take the fight to federal courts, where we will prevail.' KOIN 6 News reached out to ICE officials, but we have yet to receive a response. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
Federal lawsuit looks to halt Arkansas' Educational Freedom Account program; claims it violates US Constitution
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KNWA/KFTA) — Four Arkansans have filed a federal lawsuit against multiple state departments over the state's Educational Freedom Accounts, claiming it violates the United States Constitution. The lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of Arkansas on June 13. The plaintiffs are Gwen Faulkenberry of Franklin County, Special Renee Sanders of Drew County, Anika Whitfield of Pulaski County and Kimberly Crutchfield of Pulaski County. The lawsuit names Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the Arkansas Department of Education, the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration, Education Secretary Jacob Oliva, Secretary of the Department of Finance and Administration Jim Hudson and the nine-member state Board of Education, who are represented by state Attorney General Tim Griffin's office. The plaintiffs said in the 108-page complaint that the Education Freedom Accounts, or 'the Voucher Program', violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits the government from favoring one religion over others. Benton County employee fired after sexual misconduct investigation It also claims that the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment is violated, which mandates that people in similar circumstances receive the same treatment under the law. Article 2, Section 24 in the Arkansas Constitution is also reportedly violated. The article prohibits people from being compelled to attend any place of worship against their consent and bars the state from giving preference by law to religious establishments, denominations or modes of worship 'above any other.' 'The LEARNS Act is, through the use of public funds of the State of Arkansas, creating a separate and unequal dual school system of public and private schools, the latter of which, as a regular part of their curricula, teach the doctrines of particular religious, creeds and sects as a means of the establishment, encouragement, development and perpetuation of such religions, creeds and sects,' the complaint said. The plaintiffs say in the complaint that the EFA system 'denies the equal protection of the laws available and applicable to Arkansas school children based on economic, racial and physical characteristics and abilities.' It also allegedly creates a 'system of private schools that are not available to all school children in Arkansas because such private schools are not located in and accessible to school children in many rural areas' in the state. The Arkansas Department of Education's website reports that since the start of the 2023-24 school year, Arkansans have applied for more than 64,000 Education Freedom Accounts. Voucher recipients were given at least $6,856 each for the 2024-25 school year, and next year's will receive $6,864, the ADE previously told KNWA/FOX24. The EFA program was created by the LEARNS Act in 2023. It aims to provide state-funded accounts to approved families, helping them cover the costs of private school tuition, homeschooling, and other educational expenses. 5 Arkansas-based companies in Forbes' latest 'Global 2000' list A spokesperson for Governor Sanders' office gave the following statement to KNWA/FOX24 on Friday: 'This suit has no merit. More than 44,000 students have applied for EFAs for next school year and far-left activists are playing politics with those kids' futures to try and protect a failed status quo.' The Department of Finance and Administration said that as a policy, the department does not comment on any active litigation. 'The LEARNS Act has been a game-changer for Arkansas. Where previously there was stagnation, we now see progress. Where there was malaise, we now see hope. I have successfully defended the LEARNS Act and will eagerly do it again,' Attorney General Tim Griffin's office said in a statement. KNWA/FOX24 also reached out to the Arkansas Department of Education for comment, but has not heard back. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
