NetChoice & CCIA v. Paxton
The NetChoice and CCIA lawsuit explained that:
- Internet platforms have a First Amendment right to curate content and decide whether to host specific instances of speech as they see fit.
- The Act does not prevent censorship but empowers the State of Texas to police and control speech online, overriding the First Amendment rights of online businesses.
- The Act tramples the First Amendment by allowing the government to force private businesses to host speech they don’t want to.
- The Act discriminates against specific speakers by only targeting businesses over a certain size.
- The Act will fail under any level of First Amendment analysis as it is not narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest.
Find the full NetChoice and CCIA lawsuit here.
NetChoice and CCIA filed a motion for preliminary injunction on September 30, 2021.
Further court documents for the motion for preliminary injunction:
- Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for leave to file over-length motion for preliminary injunction
- Court’s grant of plaintiffs’ unopposed motion
- Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
- NetChoice Declaration
- CCIA Declaration
Third-party support of the motion for preliminary injunction:
- Declaration from YouTube
- Declaration from Facebook
- Declaration from LGBT Technology Institute
- Declaration from Stop Child Predators
- Declaration from Technology Network
NetChoice and CCIA were granted their Preliminary Injunction on December 1st, 2021.
The ruling joined a similar ruling from the Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee Division on SB 7072, in which the Court granted a preliminary injunction to block the implementation of Florida’s SB 7072 on constitutional grounds to protect Florida consumers, small businesses, and free speech.
The State of Texas appealed NetChoice and CCIA’s Preliminary Injunction granted by the Fifth Circuit:
- State of Texas Opening Brief in 5th Circuit
- NetChoice & CCIA Opening Brief in 5th Circuit
- Amicus Brief by Hon. Chris Cox, Author of Section 230
- NetChoice & CCIA’s Response to Texas’ Opening Brief
- Texas’s Response to NetChoice & CCIA’s Opening Brief
On May-11, the Fifth Circuit lifted the district court’s injunction on HB 20:
On May-13, NetChoice and CCIA filed an Emergency Application for Immediate Relief to the Supreme Court of the United States, seeking to get the Fifth Circuit Corder Order overturned:
On May-17 and 18, amicus briefs were filed by several organizations in support of NetChoice & CCIA’s request. Please view this page to see a full summary of all the briefs:
- Chamber of Progress
- TechFreedom *please note this filing contains real examples of vile content that HB 20 protects from moderation*
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
- Cato Institute
- Center for Democracy & Technology & Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Honorable Christopher Cox
- Eric Goldman
- Copia Institute
On May-18, The State of Texas filed their brief in opposition to NetChoice and CCIA’s request. The state of Florida also filed an amicus brief supporting the State of Texas and opposing NetChoice & CCIA.
On May-18, Texas filed its response brief.
On May-19, NetChoice and CCIA filed a response to Texas’ brief.
On May-31, SCOTUS ruled on NetChoice & CCIA’s application for emergency relief.
As President and CEO, Steve works with NetChoice members to set and execute the NetChoice agenda. Steve has become a well-known expert on Internet governance, online consumer protection, and Internet taxation. He’s provided expert testimony in 25 Congressional hearings and many more state legislative sessions.
Steve advocates for NetChoice positions at the National Conference of State Legislatures and the American Legislative Exchange Council, where he serves on the Private Enterprise Board. Moreover, Steve regularly enters the lion’s den at the Streamlined Sales Tax Governing Board, where he’s the lone opponent of new tax burdens on Internet commerce.
As Vice President and General Counsel, Carl analyzes tech-related legislative and regulatory initiatives relevant to online companies. He monitors and analyzes Federal and state legislation. Carl is also an adjunct professor of internet law at the George Mason Antonin Scalia Law School.
Carl obtained his J.D. and Communications Law Certificate from the Catholic University of America, magna cum laude, and Carl obtained his B.A. in Economics, Managerial Studies, and Policy Studies from Rice University. Carl is licensed to practice law in Washington, DC and is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP/US)
As Director of Public Affairs, Robert works to publicize and promote our work to key audiences, acting as the bridge between complex issues in technology policy and regular political dialogue. Robert works to ensure that NetChoice is effectively publicized, reaching both traditional and non-traditional audiences.
Before joining NetChoice, Robert worked as the Digital Marketing & Outreach Manager at TechFreedom, where he focused on analyzing ways to better understand how the public perceived these issues through message testing and paid advertising. He is deeply interested in working to curb populist demands that undermine technology’s positive impact on human wellbeing and prosperity.
As Counsel, Chris analyzes technology-related legislative and regulatory issues at both the federal and state level. His portfolio includes monitoring and analyzing proposals to amend § 230 of the Communications Decency Act, antitrust enforcement, and potential barriers to free speech and free enterprise on the internet.
Before joining NetChoice in 2019, Chris worked as a law clerk at the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center, where he analyzed legal issues relevant to the business community, including state-court decisions that threatened traditional liability rules. Chris earned his J.D. from Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, and earned a B.A. in History and Political Science at Boston College, graduating cum laude from both institutions. Chris is a member of the D.C. bar.