Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 08-16-2024
Case Style:
Netchoice, LLC v. Bob Bonta
Case Number: 5:22-CV-08861
Judge: Beth Labson Freeman
Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: Robert Corn-Revers, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
Defendant's Attorney: California Attorney General's Office
Description:
San Francisco, California privacy law lawyers represented the parties.
In 2022, the California State Legislature enacted the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (CAADCA or Act), Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1798.99.28-1798.99.40, with the express aims of promoting robust online privacy protections for children under the age of eighteen and ensuring that online products that are likely to be accessed by children "are designed in a manner that recognizes the distinct needs of children." See 2022 Cal. Legis. Serv. Ch. 320 (A.B. 2273) § 1(b); Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.99.30(b)(1). NetChoice, a national trade association of online businesses with the stated goal of promoting free speech and free enterprise on the Internet, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging the CAADCA on constitutional and federal preemption grounds. The district court found that NetChoice was likely to succeed in its argument that the provisions challenged by NetChoice violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and were not severable from the valid remainder of the CAADCA. The district court therefore entered a preliminary injunction preventing the entire law from going into effect.
Outcome:
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: