Global (Commonwealth Union) _ Tech Mogul Elon Musk’s X Corp has filed a lawsuit opposing the constitutionality of the ‘Stop Hiding Hate Act’, a newly passed law that required significant social media companies to disclose content moderation policies. This included divulging details of the companies’ ‘hate speech’, ‘disinformation’, ‘online harassment’, and ‘foreign political interference’ addressing processes.
The lawsuit was filed in the Manhattan federal court and argues that in compelling social media companies like X to provide reports containing information that is protected under the constitutional free speech rights and may be considered sensitive or controversial, the law is in violation of the First Amendment.
X had also previously filed a lawsuit in California, resulting in a federal appeals court partially blocking a similar law that stirred free speech concerns.
The conflict between government transparency directives and private social media platforms’ right to regulate content without interference from the government remains the central issue.
X’s legal team claims to be subjected to lawsuits and “potentially large fines” reaching over $15,000 per violation per day if the company fails to cooperate with the requirements of disclosure specified by the New York law.
State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assemblymember Grace Lee are sponsoring the law and insist that the act is necessary during a time when extremism and political violence are increasing steadily to ensure public accountability. They also stated concerns regarding the threat that democracy faces due to companies with records similar to X.
Governor Kathy Hochul signed the bill into law in December, following its development in collaboration with the Anti-Defamation League. Those behind the bill issued a statement on Tuesday criticising the lawsuit, arguing that it does not violate free speech rights by demanding social media companies censor speech, reiterating that it only requires companies to produce reports regarding moderation efforts.
This framing has been contested by X, which claimed that companies would be obliged to invade editorial discretion by revealing decisions involving internal policies and that the defining of hate speech is a matter of public debate rather than a government-imposed singular standard.
