An Arkansas federal court recently issued a preliminary injunction barring authorities in the Natural State from enforcing a speech-restrictive statute called Act 901. Among other things, it prohibits social media platforms from using algorithms they know or reasonably should know will cause “a user to: (1) purchase a controlled substance; (2) develop an eating disorder; (3) commit or attempt to commit suicide; or (4) develop or sustain an addiction to the social media platform[s].”
Chief US District Judge Timothy L. Brooks’ ruling in NetChoice v. Griffin marks yet another victory for NetChoice in its seemingly ceaseless battle against state laws that curb the First Amendment speech rights of two groups—users (to express and receive lawful content) and platforms (to exercise editorial discretion and moderate content without government interference). Brooks’ decision also offers several constitutional lessons for lawmakers about such measures; two are addressed below.