Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen (R) is resisting calls by five individual TikTok users and TikTok itself to personally depose him during the discovery phase of the two consolidated cases that challenge the constitutionality of the state's TikTok ban, said Knudsen’s response Thursday (docket 9:23-cv-00061) in U.S. District Court for Montana in Missoula.
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita (R) seeks a stay in the case brought by seven media organizations to block enforcement of the state's "buffer law,” pending the outcome of a YouTuber’s appeal (docket 24-1099) in the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (see 2401230006), said Rokita’s motion Wednesday (docket 1:23-cv-01805) in U.S. District Court for Southern Indiana in Indianapolis. The media organizations, which include Nexstar, Scripps, Tegna and the Indianapolis Star, all oppose the stay, said Rokita’s motion.
California’s social media transparency law, AB-587, “reflects a growing trend of government interference in the private editorial judgments” of businesses that operate on the internet, said the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in an amicus brief Wednesday (docket 24-271) at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in support of X’s appeal to block California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) from enforcing it (see 2401160031).
The 4th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court affirmed a district court jury’s finding of willful contributory copyright infringement against Cox Communications for the piracy actions of some of its 6 million internet customers, but it reversed the jury’s vicarious liability verdict, said a three-judge panel’s published opinion Tuesday (docket 21-1168). Circuit Judge Allison Jones Rushing wrote the opinion, in which Judges Pamela Harris and Henry Floyd joined.
The Media Alliance and Great Public Schools Now seek to intervene in support of the FCC in eight petitions for review of the commission’s Nov. 20 digital discrimination order, now consolidated in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, said the nonprofits’ unopposed motion Tuesday.
The three plaintiff-appellants seeking to reverse the district court’s order compelling their false advertising claims against SiriusXM to individual arbitration (see 2311130005) joined with SiriusXM Friday to ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court to stay the appeal (docket 23-4018), pending the outcome of an important U.S. Supreme Court arbitration case. SiriusXM also wants the 9th Circuit to stay its cross-appeal (docket 23-4338) challenging the district court’s authority to dismiss the case instead of staying the proceedings after compelling claims to arbitration.
Both sides during oral argument Friday at the 2nd U.S. Circuit Appeals Court in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ (D) appeal to reverse the injunction that bars her from enforcing New York’s Hateful Conduct Law (see 2310160001) gave less than definitive answers when asked by the three-judge panel whether a ruling in James’ appeal should await the U.S. Supreme Court's resolution of NetChoice’s First Amendment challenges to the Florida and Texas social media content-moderation laws (see 2311300012).
Petitioners Maurine and Matthew Molak want the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to “disregard the statutory requirement” under Communications Act Section 405(a) that persons who weren’t parties before the FCC file a petition for reconsideration as a “condition precedent” to seeking judicial review, said the FCC and DOJ reply Friday (docket 23-60641) in support of their motion to dismiss the Molaks’ petition (see 2402070002).
The Chamber of Progress, CTA and six other nonprofits support the development of features to keep kids safe online, but they’re concerned that California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, AB-2273, “restricts websites from exercising their First Amendment rights to moderate content,” said their amicus brief Wednesday (docket 23-2969) in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The brief supports NetChoice and affirming the district court's preliminary injunction that bars California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) from enforcing AB-2273 (see 2309190006).
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has a substantial interest in the resolution of NetChoice’s constitutional challenge to AB-2273, California’s social media law, because it “implicates the stability” of the internet economy and “core constitutional rights of participants in that economy,” said the Chamber’s amicus brief Wednesday (docket 23-2969) at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The brief supports NetChoice’s challenge and affirmance of the district court’s preliminary injunction blocking California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) from enforcing AB-2273 (see 2309190006).