District Court Erroneously Deals Blow to the California Age Appropriate Design Code

Washington, D.C. – For the second time, Judge Labson Freeman has dealt a decisive blow to the California Age Appropriate Design Code (CAADC), flouting binding judgments from both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit to bring a scalpel, and not an axe, to her First Amendment analysis. Her decision would presumptively prohibit any legislation intended to protect kids online, and again reveals the extent to which she misunderstands the CAADC–a law intended to protect kids online using an approach focused on privacy by default and safety by design–not on content moderation. Despite the Ninth Circuit’s admonition to the district court that the CAADC extends to a broad range of online businesses, which per Moody v NetChoice must be fully considered in all their applications on a facial constitutional challenge, the court instead exclusively confined its inquiry to the coverage and applications of this law on only a small subset of social media companies. Further, the court ignores the Ninth Circuit’s invitation to analyze regulations of dark patterns and the use of kids’ sensitive personal information as a content-neutral regulation of expression.

Tech Justice Law Project (TJLP) is disappointed in this erroneous decision, but heartened by the trend around the country to use a scalpel to assess the First Amendment implications of internet regulations. TJLP has consistently advocated for a content-neutral design-based approach to internet regulation, and will continue to do so.