Free speech battles and age-appropriate balance: Unpacking the Ninth Circuit NetChoice decision

In August 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issued its decision upholding in part and vacating in part the lower district court's preliminary injunction that blocked the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act from going into effect. More specifically, the federal appellate court upheld the preliminary injunction against the law's data protection impact assessment report requirements on constitutional grounds, while vacating the remainder of the order against other challenged portions of the law. Both NetChoice and California state officials hailed the decision as a victory, highlighting that questions still remain about its impact.

This is the latest decision in NetChoice v. Bonta, a case that highlights the friction between free speech principles and youth online privacy and safety laws.

Background

The AADCA was signed into law in September 2022. It was quickly met with constitutional and other legal challenges when NetChoice filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of California a few months later. NetChoice's motion for a preliminary injunction in February 2023 sought to block the law from being enforced as planned beginning in July 2024.

In September 2023, Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted the preliminary injunction, peeking at the constitutional issues and finding various provisions would likely violate the First Amendment under a special type of intermediate scrutiny. In a prior article, the IAPP provided a detailed analysis of the district court decision. For those new to U.S. free speech law, the earlier article also provides a roadmap for how judges approach First Amendment challenges.