Close this menu

NetChoice v. Murrill (Louisiana)

Key Takeaways:
  • Government blocking access to free, protected speech and conditioning access to digital services on whether a Louisianan is willing to surrender their private information violates the Constitution and risks the safety and security of all Louisianans online.
  • NetChoice is suing Louisiana to keep online communication safe and free and to ensure meaningful and legal—not unconstitutional—legislation is implemented to protect families and their rights online.
What's At Stake
  • Blocking access to protected speech online violates the First Amendment.
  • Louisiana’s law poses a serious threat to cybersecurity and online safety.
  • Prevents social media from providing family-friendly advertising.
  • SB 162 usurps parents and seizes their role for the State.
Case Brief

Case Status: Complaint Filed

Latest Update: March 18, 2025

Attorneys:
Steve Lehotsky Scott Keller Jeremy Maltz Jared Magnuson Josh Morrow Shannon Denmark

Firms:
Lehotsky Keller Cohn

Timeline
  • U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
    March 18, 2025: NetChoice files complaint

NetChoice sued Louisiana to stop SB 162, a law forcing Louisianans to surrender private information to access protected speech online—violating the First Amendment and putting their data at risk. 

The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, is a government mandate blocking access to free, protected speech online by conditioning that access on whether a Louisianan is willing to surrender their private information.

This violates the Constitution and risks the safety and security of all citizens. NetChoice is confident the Court will agree.

Read NetChoice’s complaint initiating the lawsuit, filed on March 18, 2025, here.

Top Takeaways of NetChoice v. Murrill:

  1. Blocking access to protected speech online violates the First Amendment: Louisiana’s government passed a law, SB 162, conditioning access to protected speech online on whether users are willing to forfeit sensitive documentation to digital services. This violates First Amendment rights and will result in Louisiana citizens losing access to legitimate online speech.
  2. Louisiana’s law poses a serious threat to cybersecurity and online safety: By mandating that users go through identity verification processes, Louisiana’s government unintentionally risks the security of all their citizens—especially minors—by putting their most sensitive documents and information into a honeypot for online predators and cybercriminals to exploit. In Louisiana, this threat isn’t theoretical; hackers in 2023 attacked the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles that compromised the data of 6 million Louisianans. 
  3. Prevents social media from providing family-friendly advertising: By prohibiting the ability of social media websites to disseminate personalized ads, this law actively makes it more difficult for social media companies to take steps to ensure that minors are shown content that is appropriate.
  4. SB 162 usurps parents and seizes their role for the State. Parents and guardians are best situated to determine their family’s online presence—not big government red tape that puts safety, security and free speech in jeopardy.

Our Team

Chris Marchese, Director of Litigation

Link to bio

Paul Taske, Associate Director of Litigation

Link to Bio

Court Filings

  • NetChoice Complaint, filed March 18, 2025, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana.
  • NetChoice’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, filed on March 18, 2025, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana.
    • Memo supporting the motion for preliminary injunction.