Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon and podcaster Tim Pool are suing California's attorney general Rob Bonta over a new law that reportedly violates the First Amendment.
The new law enforces social media companies to define undesirable speech and file quarterly reports on how they have policed it. The content moderation policies include multiple speech categories the state could label as misinformation/disinformation, extremism/radicalization, hate speech, foreign political interference, and racism.
If a social media company fails to file the reports, they could face a $15,000 fine per violation per day for non-compliance.
According to the lawsuit, AB 587 "is a censorship bill, not a transparency bill."
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif) defended the law saying that he will not allow social media to spread hate and disinformation that threatens the U.S.
"Californians deserve to know how these platforms are impacting our public discourse. This action brings much-needed transparency and accountability to the policies that shape the social media content we consume every day. I thank Assembly Member Gabriel for championing this important measure to protect Californians from hate, harassment, and lies spread online," Newsom said.
The "unconstitutional" law will be used to censor speech that does not align with the Democratic Party's radical agenda.
"California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Bonta have both expressed a desire to use state power to chill speech they do not approve of, constitutionally protected expression they refer to with derogatory labels like 'disinformation,' 'hate speech,' and 'extremism,'" the lawsuit reads.
In 2022, Bona wrote a letter to YouTube, Meta, Twitter, TikTok, and Reddit demanding them to censor so-called "dangerous disinformation, misinformation, conspiracy theories, and threats" that spread fear and political violence.
In a Substack post regarding the lawsuit, Dillon wrote: "It's a good thing when people are allowed to speak freely. It's bad when Big Tech and the government work together to decide what we're allowed to say. Why? Because they often get it wrong. Even worse, they get it wrong on purpose."
He also pointed out that it would be considered "hateful conduct" if someone described a male person as a man.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member