Judge Grants Injunction Blocking Florida's Unconstitutional Social Media Law

> First, the State has asserted it is on the side of the First Amendment; the plaintiffs are not. It is perhaps a nice sound bite. But the assertion is wholly at odds with accepted constitutional principles. The First Amendment says “Congress” shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. The Fourteenth Amendment extended this prohibition to state and local governments. The First Amendment does not restrict the rights of private entities not performing traditional, exclusive public functions. See, e.g., Manhattan Cmty. Access Corp. v. Halleck, 139 S. Ct. 1921, 1930 (2019). So whatever else may be said of the providers’ actions, they do not violate the First Amendment.

This assertion has come up so many times on HN, I can't help but gloat a little seeing it spelled out so clearly by a justice of the courts. Compelled speech is not free speech! Facebook is not the government! My only sorrow is that the utter incompetence of this legislation will keep it out of higher courts.

The theme park exemption for this attempted law is absolutely hilarious. It has no justification whatsoever other than helping Disney.

direct link to PDF of injunction: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flnd.37...

I wonder what Facebook (et al) planned to do if this went live? Would it be easier to drop all of Florida (similar to the Australian news thing) than comply? Or maybe open up a Florida-only version to limit exposure? I’m not sure this legislation would have helped the state if it went through.

Didn't take a hot second for that, to nobody's surprise.