Case: NetChoice LLC v. Paxton

1:21-cv-00840 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas

Filed Date: Sept. 22, 2021

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

Two trade associations filed suit against Ken Paxton, the Attorney General of Texas, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas on September 22, 2021. Represented by private counsel, they challenged a Texas state law, H.B. 20, that placed restrictions on social media platforms with over 50 million active users in the United States within one calendar month. They targeted two sections: section 2, which implemented detailed disclosure and moderation requirements, and section 7, …

Two trade associations filed suit against Ken Paxton, the Attorney General of Texas, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas on September 22, 2021. Represented by private counsel, they challenged a Texas state law, H.B. 20, that placed restrictions on social media platforms with over 50 million active users in the United States within one calendar month. They targeted two sections: section 2, which implemented detailed disclosure and moderation requirements, and section 7, which made it unlawful for covered platforms to block, ban, or otherwise restrict users based on their “viewpoint.” Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the enforcement of H.B. 20’s sections 2 and 7. The case was assigned to Judge Robert Pitman.

Plaintiffs’ five claims were as follows.

  • The law violated platforms’ First Amendment right to editorial judgment as it both compelled expression and prohibited platforms’ direct expression. In addition, they argued the burdensome disclosure and moderation requirements were designed to chill speech for certain disfavored platforms.
  • The law should be voided for vagueness. Specifically, the statute's vaguely defined terms would permit arbitrary enforcement.
  • Various claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In violation of the Commerce Clause, the law allowed Texas to regulate and penalize out-of-state commerce as most of the platforms’ traffic occurred outside of Texas. Under the Full Faith and Credit and Due Process Clause, a state can regulate transactions only if there’s “significant contact” with the state, which Plaintiffs’ argued Texas lacked.
  • The law should be preempted under the Supremacy Clause and 47 U.S.C. § 230 (which protects information content providers’ ability to moderate materials). Under section 230, Congress provided broad immunity to web-based service providers for all claims stemming from publication of third-party information.
  • In violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, the law specifically and arbitrarily targeted certain platforms.

Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction on October 1, 2021.  Plaintiffs reiterated their allegations from the complaint. In addition, they stated that platforms’ inability to moderate would cause irreparable harm through inundation with abusive, offensive, and unsafe materials, ranging from hate speech to foreign-state propaganda. As a result, users, platforms, and advertisers alike would be harmed experientially and financially. 

Texas moved to dismiss the case on October 14, 2021, for lack of jurisdiction. They argued the plaintiffs lacked associational and organizational standing because plaintiffs were non-profit organizations and not the actual social media platforms targeted by H.B. 20. Further, they claimed that the platforms “attempted to shield themselves from the burdens of challenging a law they do not like by getting their lobbying groups to do it for them.”

The court both granted plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction and denied Texas’ motion to dismiss on December 1, 2021. As to the preliminary injunction, the court found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated there would be an irreparable harm as “[t]he loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.” In addition, the court determined a likelihood of success on the merits based on precedent upholding various groups' First Amendment right to editorial discretion. However, none of the cases cited explicitly applied to social media platforms. As to the motion to dismiss, the court determined the plaintiffs had established the three elements for associational standing: the association members had standing, the interests at stake matched the organization’s purpose, and the suit did not require participation of individual association members. 573 F.Supp.3d 1092.

Shortly thereafter, Texas filed an interlocutory appeal with the Fifth Circuit on December 6, 2021, appealing both the preliminary injunction and the denial of the motion to dismiss. On the same day, Texas also moved to stay the preliminary injunction in the district court, arguing that the order was overbroad as it was “not limited to the least intrusive means” and “could have been far more narrowly tailored” rather than halting enforcement of the law entirely. The following day, on December 7, 2021, plaintiffs filed a motion with the district court to stay the case pending the appeal.

On December 9, 2022, Texas’ motion to stay the preliminary injunction was denied. Plaintiffs’ motion to stay the case was only granted in part as the court declined to preemptively agree to lift the stay should the Fifth Circuit or Supreme Court alter the preliminary injunction. 2021 WL 7081434.

The Fifth Circuit summarily granted Texas’s motion to stay the District Court’s preliminary injunction pending appeal on May 11, 2022. 2022 WL 1537249. However, the U.S. Supreme Court summarily vacated the Fifth Circuit’s stay of the preliminary injunction May 31, 2022. 142 S.Ct. 1715.

The Fifth Circuit issued an opinion on September 16, 2022. They vacated the preliminary injunction and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the opinion. First, the court held that platforms’ act of censoring speech based on user’s viewpoints was not protected speech and thus did not trigger First Amendment protections. Second, it held that H.B. 20 prohibiting censorship of speech did not violate platforms’ First Amendment right to editorial discretion. Platforms were likened to “indispensable conduits for transporting information” rather than newspapers, where the right to editorial discretion originally derived. Third, it found that H.B. 20 advanced Texas’s important interest in protecting the free exchange of ideas and information. Finally, the court held that platforms were not entitled to pre-enforcement facial relief against H.B. 20’s disclosure and moderation requirements. The court found plaintiffs’ arguments that the requirements were burdensome unpersuasive as they were based on “a small number of applications.” 49 F.4th 439.

The plaintiffs subsequently moved to stay issuance of the mandate for the Fifth Circuit’s decision pending decision on their forthcoming writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. The Fifth Circuit granted the stay on October 12, 2022.

As of October 2022, this case is ongoing.

Summary Authors

Eric Gripp (12/29/2022)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60413417/parties/netchoice-llc-v-paxton/


Attorney for Plaintiff
Attorney for Defendant

Baasch, Ryan

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Barthold, Corbin

Berry, Thomas Arthur

Brown, Bruce D.

Counsel, William Scott

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Fifth Circuit Docket

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Oct. 12, 2022

Oct. 12, 2022

Docket
1

1:21-cv-00840

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

Complaint
51

1:21-cv-00840

Order

Dec. 1, 2021

Dec. 1, 2021

Order/Opinion

573 F.Supp.3d 573

57

1:21-cv-00840

21-51178

Order

Dec. 9, 2021

Dec. 9, 2021

Order/Opinion

2021 WL 2021

59

1:21-cv-00840

USCA Order

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

May 11, 2022

May 11, 2022

Order/Opinion

2022 WL 2022

21-00720

Opinion

Netchoice v. Paxton

Supreme Court of the United States

May 31, 2022

May 31, 2022

Order/Opinion

142 S.Ct. 142

21-51178

Opinion

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Sept. 16, 2022

Sept. 16, 2022

Order/Opinion

49 F.4th 49

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60413417/netchoice-llc-v-paxton/

Last updated April 1, 2024, 3:05 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0542-15251569), filed by NetChoice LLC, Computer & Communications Industry Association. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Disher, Todd) (Entered: 09/22/2021)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

Clearinghouse
2

REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Disher, Todd) (Entered: 09/22/2021)

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

PACER
3

RULE 7 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by NetChoice LLC. (Disher, Todd) (Entered: 09/22/2021)

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

RECAP
4

RULE 7 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Computer & Communications Industry Association. (Disher, Todd) (Entered: 09/22/2021)

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

PACER

Case assigned to Judge Robert Pitman. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (cj)

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

PACER

If ordered by the court, all referrals and consents in this case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Hightower (cj)

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

PACER
5

Pro Hac Vice Letters mailed to Gabriela Gonzalez-Araiza, Steven P. Lehotsky, and Jonathan D. Urick re: non-admitted status. (cj) (Entered: 09/22/2021)

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

RECAP
6

Summons Issued as to Ken Paxton. (cj) (Entered: 09/22/2021)

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

PACER

Case Assigned/Reassigned

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

PACER

To be Referred to AU Mag Judge

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

PACER
7

SUMMONS Returned Executed by NetChoice LLC, Computer & Communications Industry Association. All Defendants. (Disher, Todd) (Entered: 09/23/2021)

Sept. 23, 2021

Sept. 23, 2021

RECAP
8

Unopposed MOTION for Leave to Exceed Page Limitation by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Leave, # 2 Brief re: Motion for Preliminary Injunction, # 3 Exhibit A to Mot. for PI, # 4 Exhibit B to Mot. for PI, # 5 Exhibit C to Mot. for PI, # 6 Exhibit D to Mot. for PI, # 7 Exhibit E to Mot. for PI, # 8 Exhibit F to Mot. for PI, # 9 Exhibit G to Mot. for PI)(Disher, Todd) (Entered: 09/30/2021)

Sept. 30, 2021

Sept. 30, 2021

PACER
9

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Jeremy Evan Maltz on behalf of Steven P. Lehotsky ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-15288326) by on behalf of Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Maltz, Jeremy) (Entered: 10/01/2021)

Oct. 1, 2021

Oct. 1, 2021

RECAP
10

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Jeremy Evan Maltz on behalf of Jonathan D. Urick ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-15288351) by on behalf of Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Maltz, Jeremy) (Entered: 10/01/2021)

Oct. 1, 2021

Oct. 1, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 8 Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages entered by Judge Robert Pitman. IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall file Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction and accompanying exhibits. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Oct. 1, 2021

Oct. 1, 2021

PACER
11

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Jeremy Evan Maltz on behalf of Gabriela Gonzalez Araiza ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-15288571) by on behalf of Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Maltz, Jeremy) (Entered: 10/01/2021)

Oct. 1, 2021

Oct. 1, 2021

PACER
12

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G)(dm) (Entered: 10/01/2021)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

3 Exhibit C

View on RECAP

4 Exhibit D

View on RECAP

5 Exhibit E

View on RECAP

6 Exhibit F

View on RECAP

7 Exhibit G

View on PACER

Oct. 1, 2021

Oct. 1, 2021

RECAP

Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages

Oct. 1, 2021

Oct. 1, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 9 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by attorney Steven P. Lehotsky. Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg)

Oct. 6, 2021

Oct. 6, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 10 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by attorney Jonathan D. Urick. Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg)

Oct. 6, 2021

Oct. 6, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 11 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by attorney Gabriela Gonzalez Araiza. Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg)

Oct. 6, 2021

Oct. 6, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Oct. 6, 2021

Oct. 6, 2021

PACER
13

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief by W. Reid Wittliff. by Chamber of Progress. (Attachments: # 1 Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Wittliff, William) (Entered: 10/07/2021)

1 Brief

View on RECAP

2 Proposed Order

View on RECAP

Oct. 7, 2021

Oct. 7, 2021

RECAP
14

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief by Laura Lee Prather. by The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, The American Civil Liberties Union, The Center for Democracy & Technology, The Media Law Resource Center, American Civil Liberties Union of Texas. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Brief of the The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, The American Civil Liberties Union, The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, The Center for Democracy and Technology and The Media Law Resource Center)(Prather, Laura) (Entered: 10/07/2021)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

2 Brief of the The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, The American Civi

View on RECAP

Oct. 7, 2021

Oct. 7, 2021

RECAP
15

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Jason A. Cairns on behalf of Corbin K. Barthold ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-15314243) by on behalf of TechFreedom. (Cairns, Jason) (Entered: 10/08/2021)

Oct. 8, 2021

Oct. 8, 2021

PACER
16

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief by Jason A. Cairns and Corbin K. Barthold. by TechFreedom. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Brief)(Cairns, Jason) (Entered: 10/08/2021)

Oct. 8, 2021

Oct. 8, 2021

PACER
17

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Thomas S. Leatherbury on behalf of David Greene ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-15315772) by on behalf of Electronic Frontier Foundation. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Leatherbury, Thomas) (Entered: 10/08/2021)

Oct. 8, 2021

Oct. 8, 2021

PACER
18

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Thomas S. Leatherbury on behalf of Mukund Rathi ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-15315829) by on behalf of Electronic Frontier Foundation. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Leatherbury, Thomas) (Entered: 10/08/2021)

Oct. 8, 2021

Oct. 8, 2021

PACER
19

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief by Thomas S. Leatherbury. by Electronic Frontier Foundation. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Brief of Amicus Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction)(Leatherbury, Thomas) (Entered: 10/08/2021)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

2 Brief of Amicus Curiae Electronic Frontier Foundation in Support of Plaintiffs&#

View on RECAP

Oct. 8, 2021

Oct. 8, 2021

RECAP
20

Opposed MOTION to Expedite Discovery by Ken Paxton. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Proposed Order)(Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 10/11/2021)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Oct. 11, 2021

Oct. 11, 2021

RECAP
21

Opposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 12 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Ken Paxton. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 10/11/2021)

Oct. 11, 2021

Oct. 11, 2021

PACER
22

Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC, re 21 Opposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 12 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Defendant Ken Paxton, 20 Opposed MOTION to Expedite Discovery filed by Defendant Ken Paxton (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Proposed Order)(Disher, Todd) (Entered: 10/13/2021)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Proposed Order

View on RECAP

Oct. 13, 2021

Oct. 13, 2021

RECAP
23

MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by Ken Paxton. (Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 10/14/2021)

Oct. 14, 2021

Oct. 14, 2021

RECAP
24

REPLY to Response to Motion, filed by Ken Paxton, re 20 Opposed MOTION to Expedite Discovery filed by Defendant Ken Paxton (Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 10/14/2021)

Oct. 14, 2021

Oct. 14, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 21 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply entered by Judge Robert Pitman. In light of Plaintiffs' lack of opposition to a seven-day extension, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant shall file a response to the preliminary injunction motion on or before October 22, 2021. The Court intends to expeditiously rule on Defendant's motion for expedited discovery, the outcome of which may impact Defendant's response deadline. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Oct. 15, 2021

Oct. 15, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

Oct. 15, 2021

Oct. 15, 2021

PACER
25

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 20 Opposed MOTION to Expedite Discovery Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cc3) (Entered: 10/22/2021)

Oct. 22, 2021

Oct. 22, 2021

RECAP
26

ORDER SETTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING for 12/10/2021 at 09:00 AM before Judge Robert Pitman. Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cc3) (Entered: 10/26/2021)

Oct. 26, 2021

Oct. 26, 2021

RECAP
27

ORDER RESETTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING for 11/29/2021 at 09:00 AM before Judge Robert Pitman Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cc3) (Entered: 10/28/2021)

Oct. 28, 2021

Oct. 28, 2021

RECAP
28

Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC, re 23 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Defendant Ken Paxton (Disher, Todd) (Entered: 10/28/2021)

Oct. 28, 2021

Oct. 28, 2021

RECAP
29

Opposed MOTION for Protective Order by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Proposed Order)(Disher, Todd) (Entered: 10/28/2021)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

5 Exhibit E

View on PACER

6 Exhibit F

View on PACER

7 Exhibit G

View on PACER

8 Exhibit H

View on PACER

9 Exhibit I

View on PACER

10 Proposed Order

View on RECAP

Oct. 28, 2021

Oct. 28, 2021

RECAP

Text Order GRANTING 13 Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 14 Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 16 Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 19 Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

PACER
30

BRIEF by CHAMBER OF PROGRESS(cc3) (Entered: 10/29/2021)

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

RECAP
31

BRIEF by The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, The American Civil Liberties Union, The Center for Democracy & Technology, The Media Law Resource Center, American Civil Liberties Union of Texas.(cc3) (Entered: 10/29/2021)

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

RECAP
32

BRIEF by TechFreedom. (cc3) (Entered: 10/29/2021)

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

RECAP
33

BRIEF by Electronic Frontier Foundation. (cc3) (Entered: 10/29/2021)

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

RECAP

Order on Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief

Oct. 29, 2021

Oct. 29, 2021

PACER
34

RESPONSE to Motion, filed by Ken Paxton, re 29 Opposed MOTION for Protective Order filed by Plaintiff Computer & Communications Industry Association, Plaintiff NetChoice LLC (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H)(Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 11/01/2021)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

5 Exhibit E

View on PACER

6 Exhibit F

View on PACER

7 Exhibit G

View on PACER

8 Exhibit H

View on PACER

Nov. 1, 2021

Nov. 1, 2021

RECAP
35

REPLY to Response to Motion, filed by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC, re 29 Opposed MOTION for Protective Order filed by Plaintiff Computer & Communications Industry Association, Plaintiff NetChoice LLC (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit J)(Disher, Todd) (Entered: 11/01/2021)

1 Exhibit J

View on RECAP

Nov. 1, 2021

Nov. 1, 2021

RECAP

Text Order GRANTING 15 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by attorney Corbin K. Barthold. Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg)

Nov. 2, 2021

Nov. 2, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 17 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by attorney David Greene. Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg)

Nov. 2, 2021

Nov. 2, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 18 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by attorney Mukund Rathi. Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg)

Nov. 2, 2021

Nov. 2, 2021

PACER
36

ORDER GRANTING 29 Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cc3) (Entered: 11/02/2021)

Nov. 2, 2021

Nov. 2, 2021

RECAP

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 2, 2021

Nov. 2, 2021

PACER
37

REPLY in Support, filed by Ken Paxton, re 23 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Defendant Ken Paxton (Corbello, Courtney) Modified on 11/5/2021 (cc3). (Entered: 11/04/2021)

Nov. 4, 2021

Nov. 4, 2021

RECAP
38

Unopposed MOTION for Leave to Exceed Page Limitation in Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Ken Paxton. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit A)(Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 11/22/2021)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

2 Exhibit A

View on PACER

Nov. 22, 2021

Nov. 22, 2021

RECAP
39

Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Ken Paxton, re 12 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiff Computer & Communications Industry Association, Plaintiff NetChoice LLC (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H)(Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 11/22/2021)

1 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B

View on RECAP

3 Exhibit C

View on RECAP

4 Exhibit D

View on RECAP

5 Exhibit E

View on RECAP

6 Exhibit F

View on RECAP

7 Exhibit G

View on RECAP

8 Exhibit H

View on RECAP

Nov. 22, 2021

Nov. 22, 2021

RECAP
40

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief by W. Scott McCollough. by The Babylon Bee, Not the Bee, Giganews, Inc., Golden Frog, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Brief Proposed Amicus)(McCollough, W.) (Entered: 11/22/2021)

1 Brief Proposed Amicus

View on RECAP

Nov. 22, 2021

Nov. 22, 2021

PACER
41

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by W. Scott McCollough for Evan Goldberg ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-15467980) by on behalf of Giganews, Inc., Golden Frog, Inc., Not the Bee, The Babylon Bee. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(McCollough, W.) (Entered: 11/22/2021)

1 Proposed Order

View on RECAP

Nov. 22, 2021

Nov. 22, 2021

RECAP

Text Order GRANTING 38 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Nov. 23, 2021

Nov. 23, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 40 Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief entered by Judge Robert Pitman. IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall file the amicus brief. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Nov. 23, 2021

Nov. 23, 2021

PACER
42

BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE THE BABYLON BEE, LLC, NOT THE BEE, LLC, GIGANEWS, INC. AND GOLDEN FROG GmbH IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIO (cc3) (Entered: 11/23/2021)

Nov. 23, 2021

Nov. 23, 2021

RECAP

Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages

Nov. 23, 2021

Nov. 23, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief

Nov. 23, 2021

Nov. 23, 2021

PACER
43

Opposed MOTION to Strike Report of Adam Candeub by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Disher, Todd) (Entered: 11/24/2021)

Nov. 24, 2021

Nov. 24, 2021

RECAP
44

Unopposed MOTION for Leave to Exceed Page Limitation by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Brief re: Reply ISO Motion for PI, # 2 Exhibit H, # 3 Exhibit I, # 4 Proposed Order)(Disher, Todd) (Entered: 11/24/2021)

1

View on RECAP

Nov. 24, 2021

Nov. 24, 2021

PACER
45

Exhibit List for 11.29.21 Preliminary Injunction Hearing by Ken Paxton.. (Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 11/28/2021)

Nov. 28, 2021

Nov. 28, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 44 Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Nov. 28, 2021

Nov. 28, 2021

PACER
46

Exhibit List for 11.29.2021 Preliminary Injunction Hearing by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC.. (Disher, Todd) (Entered: 11/28/2021)

Nov. 28, 2021

Nov. 28, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages

Nov. 28, 2021

Nov. 28, 2021

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 41 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice by attorney Evan Goldberg. Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Robert Pitman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jg)

Nov. 29, 2021

Nov. 29, 2021

PACER
47

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Robert Pitman: Preliminary Injunction Hearing held on 11/29/2021. Written order forthcoming. (Minute entry documents are not available electronically) (Court Reporter LilyReznik.)(cc3) (Entered: 11/29/2021)

Nov. 29, 2021

Nov. 29, 2021

PACER
48

Plaintiffs' REPLY BRIEF in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (cc3) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/30/2021: # 1 Exhibit H, # 2 Exhibit I) (cc3). (Entered: 11/29/2021)

1 Exhibit H

View on PACER

2 Exhibit I

View on PACER

Nov. 29, 2021

Nov. 29, 2021

RECAP
49

EXHIBITS from Preliminary Injunction Hearing(cc3) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/29/2021: # 1 Exhibit Plaintiff 1-8, # 2 Exhibit Defendants 1-7) (cc3). (Entered: 11/29/2021)

Nov. 29, 2021

Nov. 29, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Nov. 29, 2021

Nov. 29, 2021

PACER
50

Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Ken Paxton, re 43 Opposed MOTION to Strike Report of Adam Candeub filed by Plaintiff Computer & Communications Industry Association, Plaintiff NetChoice LLC (Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 11/30/2021)

Nov. 30, 2021

Nov. 30, 2021

RECAP
51

ORDER GRANTING 12 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; DENYING 23 Motion to Dismiss; and DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT 43 Motion to Strike. Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (jg3) (Entered: 12/01/2021)

Dec. 1, 2021

Dec. 1, 2021

Clearinghouse
52

BOND in the amount of $ 1,000.00 posted by Plaintiff(Receipt# 100040570) (cc3) (Entered: 12/02/2021)

Dec. 2, 2021

Dec. 2, 2021

PACER
53

Opposed MOTION to Stay Preliminary Injunction by Ken Paxton. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 12/06/2021)

1 Proposed Order

View on RECAP

Dec. 6, 2021

Dec. 6, 2021

RECAP
54

Appeal of Order entered by District Judge 51 by Ken Paxton. ( Filing fee $ 505 receipt number 0542-15506481) (Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 12/06/2021)

Dec. 6, 2021

Dec. 6, 2021

RECAP

NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL as to 51 Order on Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction, Order on Motion to Strike, Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction by Ken Paxton. Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0542-15506481. Per 5th Circuit rules, the appellant has 14 days, from the filing of the Notice of Appeal, to order the transcript. To order a transcript, the appellant should fill out (Transcript Order) and follow the instructions set out on the form. This form is available in the Clerk's Office or by clicking the hyperlink above. (dm)

Dec. 6, 2021

Dec. 6, 2021

PACER
55

Opposed MOTION to Stay Case Pending Appeal by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Disher, Todd) (Entered: 12/07/2021)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Dec. 7, 2021

Dec. 7, 2021

RECAP

Notice of Appeal - Interlocutory

Dec. 7, 2021

Dec. 7, 2021

PACER
56

TRANSCRIPT REQUEST by Ken Paxton for dates of 11/29/2021. Proceedings Transcribed: Preliminary Injunction. Court Reporter: Lily Reznik.. (Corbello, Courtney) (Entered: 12/09/2021)

Dec. 9, 2021

Dec. 9, 2021

PACER
57

ORDER DENYING 53 Opposed MOTION to Stay Preliminary Injunction and GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 55 Opposed MOTION to Stay Case Pending Appeal. Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cc3) (Entered: 12/09/2021)

Dec. 9, 2021

Dec. 9, 2021

Clearinghouse

Certification of the Electronic Record on Appeal has been accepted by the 5th Circuit re Notice of Appeal - Interlocutory. Attorneys are advised that they may now download the EROA from the Fifth Circuit CM/ECF site by following these instructions here (klw)

Dec. 15, 2021

Dec. 15, 2021

PACER

Appeal Record Accepted and Available Electronically

Dec. 16, 2021

Dec. 16, 2021

PACER
58

Transcript filed of Proceedings held on November 29, 2021, Proceedings Transcribed: Preliminary Injunction Hearing. Court Reporter/Transcriber: Lily I. Reznik, Telephone number: 512-391-8792 or Lily_Reznik@txwd.uscourts.gov. Parties are notified of their duty to review the transcript to ensure compliance with the FRCP 5.2(a)/FRCrP 49.1(a). A copy may be purchased from the court reporter or viewed at the clerk's office public terminal. If redaction is necessary, a Notice of Redaction Request must be filed within 21 days. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript will be made available via PACER without redaction after 90 calendar days. The clerk will mail a copy of this notice to parties not electronically noticed Redaction Request due 2/7/2022, Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 2/16/2022, Release of Transcript Restriction set for 4/18/2022, Appeal Record due by 1/31/2022, (lr) (Entered: 01/16/2022)

Jan. 16, 2022

Jan. 16, 2022

RECAP

Certification of the Supplemental Electronic Record on Appeal has been accepted by the 5th Circuit re Notice of Appeal - Interlocutory. Attorneys are advised that they may now download the Supplemental EROA from the Fifth Circuit CM/ECF site by following these instructions here (lt)

Jan. 20, 2022

Jan. 20, 2022

PACER

Appeal Record Accepted and Available Electronically

Jan. 20, 2022

Jan. 20, 2022

PACER
59

ORDER of USCA GRANTING Appellant's Motion to Stay Preliminary Injunction pending Notice of Appeal - Interlocutory. (cc3) (Entered: 05/12/2022)

May 11, 2022

May 11, 2022

RECAP
60

NOTICE of Change of Address by Jeremy Evan Maltz (Maltz, Jeremy) (Entered: 09/22/2023)

Sept. 22, 2023

Sept. 22, 2023

PACER
61

MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney Jonathan D. Urick by Computer & Communications Industry Association, NetChoice LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Maltz, Jeremy) (Entered: 09/22/2023)

Sept. 22, 2023

Sept. 22, 2023

PACER
62

Decision on Petition for WRIT OF CERTIORARI GRANTED as Notice of Appeal - Interlocutory, ISSUED by US Supreme Court, limited to Question 1 and 2 presented by the Solicitor General in her brief for the United States as amicus curiae. (klw) (Entered: 10/02/2023)

Sept. 29, 2023

Sept. 29, 2023

RECAP

Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

Oct. 19, 2023

Oct. 19, 2023

PACER

Text Order GRANTING 61 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney entered by Judge Robert Pitman. In light of the lack of opposition, IT IS ORDERED that Jonathan D. Urick is withdrawn as counsel in this case. The parties are reminded to include a certificate of conference indicating whether a motion is opposed or unopposed when filing a motion to withdraw or substitute counsel. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (sh)

Oct. 19, 2023

Oct. 19, 2023

PACER
63

Letter from the USCA directing the docket clerk to send the record on appeal of the Notice of Appeal - Interlocutory to the United States Supreme Court. (klw) (Entered: 01/19/2024)

Jan. 16, 2024

Jan. 16, 2024

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Texas

Case Type(s):

Speech and Religious Freedom

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 22, 2021

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Two non-profit trade associations representing social media platforms.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Attorney General of Texas (Austin, Travis), State

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651

Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Commerce Power

Full faith and credit

Freedom of speech/association

Equal Protection

Supremacy Clause

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Order Duration: 2021 - None

Issues

General/Misc.:

Record-keeping

Records Disclosure