LOS ANGELES, Calif.—NetChoice sued California yesterday to stop the government’s latest attack on websites that display fully protected speech. AB 56 is a law that will force websites to put up state-scripted “warning” messages discouraging Californians from using online services and promoting the government’s controversial views on social media. This is compelled speech, a direct violation of the First Amendment.
“The First Amendment is not a suggestion,” said Paul Taske, Director of the NetChoice Litigation Center.
“California cannot force a private website to act as a mouthpiece for its preferred message. The State is free to speak for itself, but the Constitution forbids it from forcing others to speak for it. A federal court already blocked Colorado’s nearly identical law, and there is no First Amendment exception for California.”
WHY CALIFORNIANS SHOULD CARE:
- The warnings take up as much as 75% of the screen for up to 30 seconds, cannot be skipped, and come back up every hour after three hours online, no matter how many times users have seen them.
- An unconstitutional law protects no one, and in this case, it actively undermines the public’s access to diverse perspectives and information.
- California is exploiting legitimate concerns about mental health to justify its attacks on speech services.
- Politicians are using “public health” as a backdoor way to control online speech. States cannot do by “warning label” what they are unable to do by outright ban. A federal court already blocked Colorado’s nearly identical law on First Amendment grounds, and California’s should fall too.
- California doesn’t trust adults to make their own choices, or parents to make decisions for their own families. Unless a site has verified a user is over 17, everyone gets the warning.
Read the full complaint here.
Find case resources for NetChoice v. Bonta (2026) here.
Please contact press@netchoice.org with inquiries.