Elon Musk’s ongoing battle over content moderation on his social media platform, X, has taken a significant turn as he seeks to block California’s AB-587 law. This legislation mandates detailed disclosures about how platforms like X handle controversial categories of content, including hate speech, disinformation, and foreign political interference.
At a recent hearing, three judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals appeared to agree with X’s contention that the law infringes on First Amendment rights. The law, passed in 2022, requires social media platforms to submit a “terms of service report” detailing their moderation policies for various types of content deemed controversial by the state.
X argues that this requirement forces the company to make statements about content moderation that could lead to backlash and interferes with its constitutionally protected editorial judgments. The company sued in 2023, claiming the law impermissibly pressures social media platforms to remove or alter constitutionally protected speech. The appeals court seemed more sympathetic to these arguments than a lower court, which previously declined to block the law (Ars Technica).
X’s lawyer, Joel Kurtzberg, emphasized during the hearing that the law threatens the First Amendment interests of a diverse group of people, garnering support from reporters, freedom of press advocates, and First Amendment scholars. Despite the court’s observation that the law merely requires adherence to self-defined terms of service, Kurtzberg countered that it compels X to take positions on sensitive issues.
The outcome of this appeal could set a significant precedent for how content moderation is governed, particularly in terms of striking a balance between transparency and free speech rights.