Washington – As the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee of the California Assembly prepares to hear SB 771 tomorrow, the Computer & Communications Industry Association is warning lawmakers that the bill could lead to unnecessary censorship, weaken free speech online, and violate First Amendment protections.
While CCIA supports protecting users online, SB 771 would make social media companies hesitant to host legitimate posts and discussions out of fear of unwarranted consequences. By allowing lawsuits over broad claims of “personal rights” violations, the bill would likely push more companies to take down a larger volume of content than necessary – suppressing protected speech and limiting open discourse.
SB 771 would let Californians sue large social media companies and impose penalties if their platforms or recommendation systems help spread illegal threats, harassment, or intimidation against protected groups like race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. The bill raises serious constitutional concerns by infringing on the editorial discretion of platforms, First Amendment rights that have long been protected for publishers, broadcasters, and digital services alike. Additionally, it likely conflicts with Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which shields online services from liability for user-generated content and for moderation decisions made in good faith.
The following statement can be attributed to Aodhan Downey, State Policy Manager for CCIA. Downey is scheduled to testify in opposition to the bill Tuesday:
“It’s essential that we protect users online, but SB 771 is not the right approach. By exposing platforms to vague and costly lawsuits, this bill would force services to become overly cautious and err on the side of censorship — removing far more speech than necessary and restricting legitimate conversations, all to avoid unfounded litigation. This risks undermining free expression, conflicts with federal law, and ultimately would make the online environment less open and less trustworthy. We urge the Assembly to reject this flawed measure and pursue balanced, effective solutions that will truly protect users while upholding constitutional rights and an open internet.”
