Court blocks California law on children’s online safety

By Jonathan Stempel

(Reuters) - A federal judge said California cannot enforce a state law meant to shield children from online content that could harm them mentally or physically.

U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman ruled on Thursday that the trade group NetChoice deserved a preliminary injunction because it was likely to show the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act violated its members’ free speech rights under the Constitution’s First Amendment.

NetChoice said the law would turn its 39 members including Amazon.com (NASDAQ:AMZN), Google (NASDAQ:GOOGL), Facebook and Instagram parent Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META), Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) and Elon Musk’s X into state-deputized censors, and "censor the internet under the guise of privacy."

The office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta, which defended the law, did not immediately respond on Friday to requests for comment.

Ambika Kumar, a lawyer for NetChoice, called the law "a breathtaking act of unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, content-based censorship. We are pleased to see it enjoined."

Signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2022, California’s law required businesses to create reports addressing whether their online platforms could harm children, and take steps before launch to reduce the risks.

It also required businesses to estimate ages of child users and configure privacy settings for them, or provide high settings for everyone. Civil fines could reach $2,500 per child for negligence and $7,500 per child for intentional violations.

In her 56-page decision, Freeman said the law imposed significant burdens and was not narrowly tailored to advance California’s alleged compelling interest in protecting children from bullying, harassment, sexual exploitation, sleep loss and other harms.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads.

"A regulation that focuses on the emotive impact of speech on its audience is content-based, and therefore must be drawn as narrowly as possible," the San Jose, California judge wrote. "The state has not shown that the (law) is narrowly drawn here."

Freeman also enjoined the law in September 2023. A federal appeals court set aside part of her injunction last August and ordered a reassessment. The law was supposed to take effect last July.

The case is NetChoice LLC et al v Bonta, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 22-08861.

Should you invest $2,000 in GOOGL right now?

With GOOGL making headlines, savvy investors are asking: Is it truly valued fairly? In a market full of overpriced darlings, identifying true value can be challenging. InvestingPro's advanced AI algorithms have analyzed GOOGL alongside thousands of other stocks to uncover hidden gems. These undervalued stocks, potentially including GOOGL, could offer substantial returns as the market corrects. In 2024 alone, our AI identified several undervalued stocks that later surged by 30 or more. Is GOOGL poised for similar growth? Don't miss the opportunity to find out.

Reveal Undervalued Stocks Now