The U.S. District Court of Utah granted NetChoice’s request for a preliminary injunction against the state’s Minor Protection in Social Media Act, which was set to go into effect in October. The injunction bars Utah from enforcing the law until NetChoice’s legal challenge is resolved (see 2407230034). The court “recognizes the State’s earnest desire to protect young people from the novel challenges associated with social media use,” said the ruling Tuesday from Judge Robert Shelby. “But owing to the First Amendment’s paramount place in our democratic system, even well-intentioned legislation that regulates speech based on content must satisfy a tremendously high level of constitutional scrutiny.” Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes (R) hasn’t, Shelby wrote. “Utah’s law not only violates the First Amendment, but if enforced would backfire and endanger the very people it’s meant to help,” NetChoice Litigation Center Director Chris Marchese said in a news release. This ruling is NetChoice’s sixth successful request for an injunction against a state social media law. “We look forward to seeing this law, and others like it, permanently struck down and online speech and privacy fully protected across the country,” Marchese said. Shelby said that the law was underinclusive in what companies and websites it applied to and that its provisions against autoplay didn’t appear to prevent the behavior it targeted. “Defendants do not offer any evidence that requiring social media companies to compel minors to push ‘play,’ hit ‘next,’ and log in for updates will meaningfully reduce the amount of time they spend on social media platforms,” Shelby wrote. “We’re disappointed in the district court’s decision preliminarily enjoining Utah’s Minor Protection in Social Media Act," a spokesperson for Reyes said. "The AG’s office is analyzing the ruling to determine next steps. We remain committed to protecting Utah’s youth from social media’s harmful effects.”

The Nebraska Public Service Commission later this month will consider adjusting the Enhanced Wireless 911 Fund surcharge, state commissioners agreed unanimously at a livestreamed Tuesday meeting. The Sept. 24 hearing in docket 911-002 starts at 11:30 a.m. CDT.

A disappointed Lumen is reviewing its options after the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission rejected a proposed settlement between the company and UTC staff related to the state’s method of regulation, a Lumen spokesperson said Tuesday. The pact would have reduced regulation of the telco by classifying Lumen’s CenturyLink ILECs as competitive. In a 3-0 order Friday, the commission took issue with a proposed process for discontinuing service in challenging customer locations (CCLs), which the agreement defines as “an existing CenturyLink local service customer location in Washington that lacks both fixed internet availability from at least one provider at [25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload] speed or greater priced at $61.13 per month or less, and mobile wireless service at $61.13 per month or less.” Under the pact, CenturyLink would have to get UTC approval before discontinuing stand-alone residential or business exchange service to any area including a CCL. However, the commission agreed with concerns by the state attorney general’s public counsel office that “that the CCL definition is too narrow, and that the discontinuance process could leave some customers without adequate service.” The commission sought “broader protections and a more stringent approval process.” The UTC added that “CenturyLink, a profitable company that has previously accepted federal money to provide these services to customers needs to do more to meet the needs of its most vulnerable customers who would be affected by the inequities of this proposal.” The rejection means a “temporary extension” of the current alternative form of regulation (AFOR) scheme until parties can adjust the settlement and the commission can resolve Lumen’s Jan. 8 petition seeking competitive reclassification, said the order in docket UT-240029. CenturyLink has operated for nearly a decade under an AFOR in Washington state (see 2402060015). Lumen “worked closely with [Washington UTC] staff to reach a settlement creating a comprehensive new regulatory structure reflective of today’s competitive market,” said the company’s spokesperson. “The proposed settlement contained multiple levels of safeguards that ensured no CenturyLink customers would be left without service.”

Following a letter last month to the state's school district superintendents and trustees urging them to adopt cellphone-free school policies, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) is on a 56-county tour to discuss the matter, the state said Tuesday. In the letter, Gianforte said it was "critical for all Montana schools to adopt such a policy" for student health and educational issues. He said Montana will start working with education and health officials to develop resources districts can use in crafting and implementing cellphone-free policies.

NTIA approved New Jersey's initial proposal for the broadband, equity, access and deployment program Friday. The state was allocated more than $263 million. NTIA has approved initial BEAD plans for 40 eligible entities. It approved Mississippi and South Dakota's plans last month (see 2408290037).

By not issuing a written reason, Elkhart, Indiana, improperly denied Verizon Wireless’ application to build a 135-foot monopole, the U.S. District Court for Northern Indiana ruled Friday. The court granted summary judgment for Verizon but remanded the matter to Elkhart’s Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to provide the missing explanation by Oct. 21. Verizon argued that the BZA’s unanimous decision violated Section 332 of the 1996 Telecom Act, but the city claimed that substantial evidence supported its denial. In a Friday opinion, Judge Damon Leichty said the BZA violated the Telecom Act (TCA) because it gave “no written reasons for its denial that would facilitate a meaningful appeal or enable judicial review.” As a result, “Verizon cannot meaningfully articulate a challenge to any one reason, if in fact any reason existed,” Leichty wrote. However, the court decided it will give BZA a chance to explain. “There is no question the BZA violated the TCA in never providing a written explanation, but no one seriously contends that it otherwise acted with anything but reasonable promptness in its decision,” said the judge. “Accordingly, the court will remand this matter to the BZA for a prompt TCA-compliant decision. The court will be receptive to expedited briefing and review of this matter should the BZA decline to issue the variance without such a compliant decision or without substantial evidence, upon any necessary appeal and assignment here.”

The District of Columbia’s 911 office staff can expect more D.C. Council scrutiny this fall, Judiciary and Public Safety Chair Brooke Pinto (D) said Monday. Pinto, in a news release, said she has “deep concern around continued errors and challenges” at Office of Unified Communications. Accordingly, Pinto promised monthly oversight hearings about the OUC and will make biweekly surprise visits to the 911 center. Also, Pinto plans to introduce a bill that would require public release of after-action reports within 45 days of incidents where errors may have led to serious injury or death. Also, the measure would require release of computer-aided dispatch (CAD) reports and 911 call recordings and transcripts. Dave Statter, a former journalist who regularly blogs and tweets about OUC, gave a mixed review of Pinto’s plan in a blog post Monday. Requiring OUC to disclose 911 calls and CAD reports is good because the office has refused to release that information, he said. “Unfortunately, the legislation … still allows DC911 to self-investigate critical incidents.” OUC has received much scrutiny over incidents where incorrect addresses and miscommunication prompted dispatching delays (see 2402080059).

New York has until Oct. 15 to answer ISP groups’ application seeking a U.S. Supreme Court stay of the state’s Affordable Broadband Act, Justice Sonia Sotomayor ordered Thursday in case 24A138. The state asked for the 30-day extension earlier last week (see 2409040022). Sotomayor didn’t appear to address New York’s other request for extending the Sept. 13 deadline to respond to the ISP groups’ petition for certiorari.

The Maine Public Utilities Commission is seeking information on E-911 costs for public safety answering points and dispatch centers, it said Thursday in a notice of inquiry (docket 2024-00249). A 2024 state law requires such reports annually. Comments are due Sept. 27.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) wants the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse a district court ruling that partially blocked a state law requiring age-verification to prevent kids from seeing harmful content online. Paxton filed a notice of appeal Thursday at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (docket 1:24-cv-00849). The district court ruled last week that the law likely violates the First Amendment (see 2409030039). The Computer & Communications Industry Association, the plaintiff in the case, looks "forward to demonstrating to the appellate court why the First Amendment prohibits such state legislation," said CCIA Chief of Staff Stephanie Joyce.