Close this menu

NetChoice Sues to Stop the Maryland Speech Code

BALTIMORE—Today, NetChoice filed a lawsuit challenging Maryland’s Speech Code—Orwellian restrictions on free speech that would force digital platforms either to act as government censors or to implement privacy-invasive age verification requirements that put millions of users at risk. 

The Maryland Speech Code, enacted by lawmakers last year, would effectively conscript websites and digital services to act as a digital speech police, and it creates serious cybersecurity vulnerabilities for Maryland families.

The lawsuit also emphasizes that while online safety for young people is a critical goal, it must be pursued through constitutional means that don’t infringe on free speech or create new security vulnerabilities for the very people it claims to protect. NetChoice argues that parents and families, not government employees, should make informed choice s about online access and engagement.

NetChoice v. Brown was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

“Maryland’s Speech Code is Orwellian overreach that closes off the free flow of ideas and threatens user privacy,” said Chris Marchese, Director of Litigation at NetChoice. “Turning websites into arms of government censorship violates the Constitution and creates new dangers for the very people this law claims to protect—while doing nothing to meaningfully improve online safety.”

Marchese continued: “By compelling websites to collect sensitive documentation from users, this law would create a treasure trove of personal information that could devastate Marylanders’ privacy and security if compromised,” Marchese explained. “The constitutional problems are matched only by the cybersecurity risks.”

The law presents websites with an impossible choice: either proactively censor broad categories of constitutionally protected speech or force users to submit sensitive personal information. This second option would create a massive database of personal data vulnerable to breaches and abuse.

NetChoice remains steadfast in its commitment to defending free expression and protecting online spaces from harmful and unconstitutional government intrusions.

Key Takeaways of NetChoice v. Brown:

  1. Maryland lawmakers created an unconstitutional Speech Code that puts the government in charge of deciding what information and ideas all Marylanders are “allowed” to access online, conscripting websites to act as digital speech police. This violates First Amendment rights and will result in the suppression of protected speech.
  2. Worse yet, the law would threaten Marylanders’ cybersecurity. The Maryland Speech Code basically mandates that websites either impose sweeping speech restrictions and conduct rigorous policing of speech online or conduct age verification to properly comply with the law. If websites implicitly need to conduct age verification, this means companies would be forced to collect sensitive data and documentation from all users—regardless of age. Unfortunately, young Marylanders would be under the greatest threat as minors’ data is the number one target for identity thieves and digital predators. 
  3. Big government is trying to take over digital parenting under Maryland’s Speech Code. By requiring websites to act as roving censors, conduct massive age verification, or face bureaucrats’ wrath, Maryland’s government is taking away the freedom and authority of parents to determine what’s best for them and their family’s digital presence. 
  4. Courts have already stopped a nearly identical speech code in California and similar laws in Texas, Arkansas, Utah, Mississippi, and Ohio. Maryland’s law is no different, and we’re confident the courts will block it.

Read the complaint here. Find answers to frequently asked questions on the lawsuit here.

Learn more about our new case against the Maryland Speech Code, NetChoice v. Brown, here.

Please contact press@netchoice.org with inquiries.