AT&T is asking the Mississippi Supreme Court, through an interlocutory appeal, to reverse a lower state court decision affirming Jasper County’s denial of AT&T’s request for a statutory tax exemption on all its qualified broadband equipment, said AT&T’s petition Friday (docket 2023-3955). Since the broadband exemption was first enacted in 2002, counties throughout Mississippi, including Jasper, have granted AT&T the exemption, it said. But for the 2022 tax year, Jasper for the first time denied AT&T the broadband exemption “for every single item of equipment AT&T listed as exempt," though it was substantially the same equipment that Jasper “previously had acknowledged as exempt,” it said. The only reason that Jasper gave for its “unprecedented denial” was that the equipment didn’t meet the exemption’s supposed intent, it said. Jasper has never disputed, and can’t dispute, that the equipment AT&T listed as exempt in its “renditions” for tax year 2022 “in fact meets the statutory criteria” for the broadband exemption, it said. AT&T's petition “presents a pure question of law” -- whether the broadband exemption applies when there’s no dispute that the equipment at issue “meets the plain language” of the exemption, it said. “Resolving the question now would materially advance the termination of the litigation, avoid the expense of trial, and promote uniformity of judgments across the multiple counties in which identical suits are pending,” said the petition. Granting the petition also would allow the court to clarify to all counties that the broadband exemption “must be applied as written,” it said. In so doing, the court would also “resolve the same issue in many other actions that AT&T and other providers are pursuing across the state,” it said.

The Institute for Law, Innovation & Technology at the Temple University Beasley School of Law takes no position in the appeal from California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) to reverse the district court’s injunction that blocks him from enforcing AB-2273, the state’s Age Appropriate Design Code (see 2312140003), said the institute's amicus brief Wednesday (docket 23-2969) in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The district court took a “notably broad view” of commercial speech and determined that essentially all of AB-2273's components “were facially unconstitutional,” it said. For the sake of “doctrinal integrity alone,” the 9th Circuit “may choose to revise, remand, or reign in aspects” of the district court’s decision, it said. But under all circumstances, the institute urges the 9th Circuit to “carefully consider” the statute’s data protection impact assessment (DPIA) risk management requirement, it said. It should also consider “what DPIAs actually are,” and where and how they are used, it said: “Categorically invalidating a state law with potentially national and international implications should, at the very least, be premised on an accurate and nuanced understanding of this important and widely used technical tool.” DPIAs trace their origins to federal privacy law from the 1970s, said the brief. For the past 20 years, large federal agencies have regularly conducted privacy impact assessments, which are “functionally and substantively similar” to DPIAs. These requirements help ensure that federal agencies “consider appropriately tailored data collection and processing tied to the purposes for which such records are created and maintained,” it said. DPIAs aren’t “an entirely novel or foreign creation, contrary to how they are sometimes misperceived,” it said.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals won’t stay the mandate in the court’s decision finding that elections must remain statewide for the Georgia Public Service Commission’s five members, the court ordered Monday in case 22-12593. Georgia Attorney General Christopher Carr (R) opposed the Dec. 7 motion by a group of Black voters from Fulton County, who sought the stay while they ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the decision (see 2312120002).

The office of Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody (R) and robocall defendant Smartbiz Telecom convened for a mediation video conference Friday but reached an 'impasse' in their efforts to resolve the dispute, said mediator Thomas Harper in a report Friday (docket 1:22-cv-23945) to U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in Miami. Moody’s December 2022 complaint alleges that Smartbiz is “one of the most prolific transmitters of illegal robocalls” in the U.S., and that the VoIP company violated the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act and other statutes, plus the FTC's Telemarketing Sales Rule (see 2212060034).

The nearly three dozen plaintiffs in one of multiple lawsuits seeking to establish liability for causing the Aug. 8 Lahaina wildfire on Maui that killed more than 100 and destroyed hundreds of homes and businesses (see 2311150004) voluntarily dismissed without prejudice all their claims against Hawaiian Telcom and Hawaiian Telecommunications, said their notice Friday (docket 1:23-cv-00459) in U.S. District Court for Hawaii. The notice will have no effect on the plaintiffs' currently pending claims against any of the other defendants, including Spectrum, it said. The alleged liability of Spectrum and the telecom companies came into play because they own and operate telecommunications equipment attached to the wooden power poles on Maui, under licenses from the local utilities, said the complaint. Despite their duty to properly design, construct, install, use, inspect, repair and maintain that equipment, Spectrum and the telecom companies “overloaded” at least some of the power poles, “destabilizing them” in the high winds that helped feed the wildfire, it said.

North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein (D) won an order Dec. 12 from Wake County Superior Court Judge Jonathan Perry directing TikTok to produce documents and other materials by Tuesday that Stein sought in a Sept. 23 “civil investigation demand” into allegations that TikTok violated consumer protection laws. A bipartisan group of attorneys general found in their investigation that TikTok had a secret archive of thousands of recorded internal Zoom meetings that it initially failed to disclose for nearly a year and a half. According to Stein’s office, the videos showed that TikTok executives and employees knew and discussed how their platform addicts and harms children, that the safety features TikTok promotes to parents are ineffective, and that TikTok’s business goals are more important to the company than concerns about children’s safety. Perry specifically ordered TikTok to produce all recordings of Zoom meetings it held between November 2017 and the present. “Keeping North Carolina children safe is job one -- wherever they are, including online,” said Stein in a statement Friday. “TikTok does not get to choose which parts of the law it complies with, and I’m pleased that the judge is requiring them to comply with my investigative demand. We’re going full steam ahead in our investigation to protect our kids.”

The office of Georgia Attorney General Christopher Carr (R) opposes the Dec. 7 motion of a group of Black voters from Fulton County to stay the mandate in the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision finding that elections must remain statewide for the Georgia Public Service Commission’s five members while they ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the decision (see 2312080010), said the AG office’s opposition Tuesday (docket 22-12593). “As a result of the now-reversed district court order, two commissioners have remained in office past their statutory terms,” said the opposition. “There is no basis to further prevent the voters of Georgia from voting for these important positions,” and the 11th Circuit should immediately issue the mandate in this case to allow commission elections to proceed, it said. The plaintiffs “correctly identify” the elements required to obtain a stay of the mandate, “but they do not satisfy the requirements,” it said. There’s no reason to believe SCOTUS will grant cert in this case, nor a basis to conclude that SCOTUS will reverse the 11th Circuit’s decision, the opposition said. There’s no harm to the plaintiff-appellees if the mandate issues, but there’s “great harm” to the state if it doesn’t, it said. “The requested stay would result in the continued holding over of commissioners for a second general election cycle,” it said. The 11th Circuit should deny the stay and order the district court to lift the injunction and allow commission elections to proceed, it said.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals calendared oral argument for Feb. 16 at 10 a.m. in New York in Attorney General Letitia James’ (D) appeal to reverse the injunction that blocks her from enforcing Section 394-ccc, New York’s hateful conduct law, said a text-only docket notice Monday (docket 23-356). The development had been expected (see 2311030055). James alleges that three online platform plaintiffs aren’t likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the requirements in Section 394-ccc infringe on their First Amendment rights (see 2310160001). Section 394-ccc requires social media networks to give users a mechanism for reporting hateful conduct on the network. The law also requires networks to disclose a policy explaining how the network will respond to user reports.

Plaintiffs Sierra Telephone and Sierra Tel Internet and the defendant commissioners of the California Public Utilities Commission agreed to the dismissal of Sierra’s action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(ii), said their joint stipulation Friday (docket 1:23-cv-01143) in U.S. District Court for Eastern California in Fresno. Following the court’s Nov. 27 order not to preliminarily enjoin a CPUC order related to a rural local exchange carrier ratesetting (see 2312040044, the parties met and crafted a settlement agreement, said the stipulation. The action will be dismissed to all parties, “with prejudice as to all claims, causes of action, and requested relief,” it said. Sierra won’t seek to amend the complaint, and the Nov. 27 order “stands as a final resolution of this matter,” it said. Despite finding that Sierra failed to show the likelihood of success on the merits, the court had granted it leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days. The parties will bear their attorneys’ fees and costs, said the stipulation. The Dec. 20 scheduling conference is moot “and can be taken off calendar,” and the Dec. 13 scheduling conference statement will “no longer be required,” it said.

A group of Black voters plans to go to the U.S. Supreme Court to appeal an 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision finding that elections must remain statewide for the Georgia Public Service Commission’s five members. The 11th Circuit last month reversed the Northern District of Georgia's decision blocking that method on grounds that the at-large elections constituted unlawful vote dilution under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (see 2311270001). Four Black residents of Fulton County asked the 11th Circuit on Thursday to stay the appeals court’s mandate “to preserve the status quo while they ask the Supreme Court to clarify the important issues in this case.” The Supreme Court probably will grant cert because it previously granted the appellees’ application to vacate an earlier 11th Circuit stay, they said in docket 22-12593. “There is a fair prospect that a majority of the Supreme Court will reverse this Court’s judgment,” including because it contradicts the high court’s 2023 decision in Allen v. Milligan. “Appellees will suffer irreparable harm if the mandate issues while they seek certiorari,” they added. Current PSC members would remain in office in the meantime. “Waiting a few more months for certiorari proceedings to resolve is hardly unfair.”