X has won an appeal to block parts of California\u2019s content moderation law, which requires social platforms to publicly post policies against hate speech and misinformation, as well as submit semiannual reports on their enforcement efforts. A federal appeals court decided<\/a> on Wednesday that the reporting aspect of the law likely violates the First Amendment, as reported earlier by Bloomberg Law<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n In the lawsuit, filed against California last year<\/a>, X alleged the state\u2019s social media law<\/a> violates free speech because it \u201ccompels companies like X Corp. to engage in speech against their will.\u201d A California judge later denied X\u2019s request<\/a> for a preliminary injunction of the law, arguing that the enforcement reporting requirement doesn\u2019t appear to be \u201cunjustified or unduly burdensome within the context of First Amendment law.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n The appeals court has now overturned this decision. The decision says the law\u2019s requirements are\u00a0\u201cmore extensive than necessary to serve the State\u2019s purported goal of requiring social media companies to be transparent about their content-moderation policies.\u201d <\/p>\n<\/div>\n In a statement to Bloomberg Law<\/em>, the office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta says they are \u201creviewing the opinion and will respond appropriately in court.\u201d Meanwhile, X called the decision<\/a> a \u201cvictory\u201d for the platform and \u201cfree speech nationwide.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n