Plaintiff Unimax Communications asks that the U.S. District Court for Western Washington in Seattle deny T-Mobile’s Jan. 22 motion to dismiss its breach of contract lawsuit against the carrier (see 2401240026), said Unimax’s response to the motion Tuesday (docket 2:23-cv-01830).

There may be no individual in the U.S. “more heavily targeted for social media censorship” by the federal government than Robert F. Kennedy Jr., said his U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief Friday in Murthy v. Missouri (docket 23-411). The brief supports the injunction barring White House officials and four federal agencies from coercing social media platforms to moderate their content.

Here are Communications Litigation Today's top stories from last week, in case you missed them. Each can be found by searching on its title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The district court correctly held that California’s social media law, AB-2273 likely violates the First Amendment “by attempting to control the information that can be provided to persons under 18,” said the Computer & Communications Industry Association’s amicus brief Tuesday (docket 23-2969) in support of appellee NetChoice and the injunction it won that bars California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) from enforcing AB-2273 (see 2312140003).

The sensitive personal information that Kristianne Scott and her class members entrusted to defendant Advantis Global, an IT staffing agency, was compromised and unlawfully accessed in a recent cyberattack and data breach that exposed the records of current and former employees, Scott’s class action alleged Friday (docket 3:24-cv-00795) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco.

Sheila and Dennis Thompson seek to remand Count II of their first amended Telephone Consumer Protection Act complaint against Vintage Stock to St. Louis County Circuit Court where it originated before the home entertainment retailer removed it in January 2023, said the Thompsons' memorandum Monday (docket 4:23-cv-00042) in support of their remand motion in U.S. District Court for Eastern Missouri in St. Louis.

NetChoice hailed Monday’s decision by U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley for Southern Ohio in Columbus granting NetChoice’s motion for a preliminary injunction that on constitutional grounds blocks Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost (R) from enforcing the state’s Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act. The judge previously granted NetChoice a temporary restraining order against the statute a week before it was to take effect Jan. 15 (see 2401090062).

The “extensive federal censorship campaign” outlined in the “thorough opinions” of the district court and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals undermines “deliberative democracy,” said 16 Republican state attorneys general in a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief Friday (docket 23-411) in Murthy v. Missouri in support of the injunction to bar Biden administration officials from coercing social media platforms to moderate their content.

Elizabeth Parchinskya first learned Jan. 31 that her private information was exposed in an April 27 data breach of Emmanuel College’s information network, said her class action Thursday (docket 1:24-cv-10314) in U.S. District Court for Massachusetts in Boston. The breach was discovered on Jan. 16, said a notice posted by the Maine Attorney General’s office.

Wielding “threats of intervention,” the executive branch “has engaged in a sustained effort to coerce private parties into censoring speech on matters of public concern,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and 44 other House and Senate Republicans in a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief Friday in Murthy v. Missouri (docket 23-411) in support of the social media injunction that would bar federal government coercion.