FILE PHOTO: A 3D printed Facebook's new rebrand logo Meta is seen in front of displayed Google logo in this illustration taken on November 2, 2021. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
(Reuters) -A federal judge said California cannot enforce a state law meant to shield children from online content that could harm them mentally or physically.
U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman ruled on Thursday that the trade group NetChoice deserved a preliminary injunction because it was likely to show the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act violated its members' free speech rights under the Constitution's First Amendment.
NetChoice said the law would turn its 39 members, including Amazon.com, Google, Facebook and Instagram parent Meta Platforms, Netflix and Elon Musk's X, into state-deputized censors and "censor the internet under the guise of privacy."
The office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta expressed disappointment on Friday, and said he "remains committed to tackling this issue and to defending California's common-sense statutes." It plans to respond to the decision in court.
Ambika Kumar, a lawyer for NetChoice, called the law "a breathtaking act of unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, content-based censorship. We are pleased to see it enjoined."
Signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2022, California's law required businesses to create reports addressing whether their online platforms could harm children, and take steps before launch to reduce the risks.
It also required businesses to estimate ages of child users and configure privacy settings for them, or provide high settings for everyone. Civil fines could reach $2,500 per child for negligence and $7,500 per child for intentional violations.
In her 56-page decision, Freeman said the law imposed significant burdens and was not narrowly tailored to advance California's alleged compelling interest in protecting children from bullying, harassment, sexual exploitation, sleep loss and other harms.
"A regulation that focuses on the emotive impact of speech on its audience is content-based, and therefore must be drawn as narrowly as possible," the San Jose, California, judge wrote. "The state has not shown that the (law) is narrowly drawn here."
Freeman also enjoined the law in September 2023. A federal appeals court set aside part of her injunction last August and ordered a reassessment. The law was supposed to take effect last July.
The case is NetChoice LLC et al v Bonta, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 22-08861.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Hugh Lawson and Richard Chang)
