Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Ari Cohn

@aricohn.com

49K followers 790 following 8.7K posts

First Amendment & defamation lawyer. Now: Lead Counsel for Tech Policy at @thefireorg.bsky.social Former: Free Speech Counsel at @TechFreedom.org Illini/music junkie/oofnik. “A snarky gay lawyer Jessica Fletcher.” https://linktr.ee/aricohn

linktr.ee

Posts Media Videos Starter Packs

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 6h

A cynical veto is still a veto, and an unconstitutional law isn't going to be on the books. I'm not complaining one way or another.

1 1 11

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 7h

Yep, will be invalidated quickly

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 9h

Breaking: Gavin Newsom VETOES SB 771

www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/u...

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
OCT 13 2025
To the Members of the California State Senate:
am returning Senate Bill 771 without my signature.
This bill seeks to hold social media platforms 'iable for algorithms that relay
content violating specified California civil rights laws to their users.
support the author's goal of ensuring that our nation-leading civil rights laws
apply equally both online and offline. likewise share the author's concern
about the growth of discriminatory threats, violence, and coercive harassment
online. am concerned, however, that this bill is premature. Our first step should
be to determine if, and to what extent, existing civil rights laws are sufficient to
address violations perpetrafed through algorithms. To the extent our laws prove
inadequate, they should be bolstered at that time.
For this reas
, I cannot sign this bill.
Sinc ely,
Ga
m

11 64 260

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 12h

I feel 101 years old. Here are 7 things I can now fall asleep in the middle of doing.

I'm 101 years old. Here are 7 things
I think are 'longevity secrets.'
It might just be due to luck. But there are a few things that I've done
throughout my life that may have made a difference.

2 28

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 14h

This is gobbledygook

2 9

Reposted by Ari Cohn

Mike Masnick @mmasnick.bsky.social · 14h

And we're already seeing some cave to the idea that being part of ICE makes you a "protected class." So... yeah... www.techdirt.com/2025/10/10/a...

10 65 170

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

That's not what a false equivalence is.

That is exactly what the law enables and will be used for.

If the bill is signed, the courts will strike it down.

3 14

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

evergreen

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

If you would like to actually understand all of this, I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. But otherwise, you have yourself a nice day too.

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

What on earth does that (a) mean, and (b) have to do with anything?

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

4) oh and by the way, this bill covers every single time a platform displays any piece of content to any user. So no, it doesn't just cover what is incorrectly portrayed as "the platform's own conduct."

It is the hosting and displaying content. The exact thing 230 protects.

1 10

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

And if you think you're safe on the left, you're not.

The right has been pushing that calling them "fascist" should be illegal / somehow punished.

With SB 771 they'll be able to sue platforms for aiding & abetting intimidation/violence based on political affiliation for allowing you to post that.

California Code, Civil Code - CIV § 51.7
Current as of January 01, 2024 | Updated by FindLaw Staff

(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976.

(b)(1) All persons within the jurisdiction of this state have the right to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of political affiliation, or on account of any characteristic listed or defined in subdivision (b) or (e) of Section 51, or position in a labor dispute, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of those characteristics. The identification in this subdivision of particular bases of discrimination is illustrative rather than restrictive.

6 25 89

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

3) The algorithm's content relaying is also protected by the First Amendment, which doesn't allow the government to say "you're liable whenever it relays content that turns out to be unlawful in some way." That's been clear since the 50s.

2 5

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

1) That's not how Section 230 works. If the liability can't exist but for the underlying content, & the platform doesn't contribute to what makes it unlawful, 230 forbids liability

2) Broadcast media and social media are not the same, and the government doesn't regulate content on broadcast either

1 5

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 15h

Uh, what?

The law is already pretty clear that this law both unconstitutional and preempted by federal law. Platforms are already not liable for "aiding and abetting" just for hosting and displaying user-generated content.

If you have read the piece, I'd suggest reading it again.

1 4

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 16h

Then you should know that this bill actually does change quite a bit.

1 5

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 16h

You should read the piece to understand why that's simply not true.

1 5

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 17h

I've yet to be convinced that there's need for "reform."

And haven't seen a proposal that doesn't have drastic, terrible consequences, unintentional or otherwise.

But open to being convinced that some narrow, targeted change is needed & possible w/o breaking everything. Just haven't seen it yet.

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 17h

The best time to not violate the First Amendment is now.

The second best time is also now.

1 5 44

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 17h

One day left for @governor.ca.gov @gavinnewsom.bsky.social to act on SB 771.

The clear First Amendment violation & obvious preemption by Section 230 **demand** a veto.

There is no value or virtue in chilling protected speech with a law that courts WILL strike down.

www.thefire.org/news/califor...

3 29 88

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 1d

To be fair, the secret soundproof basement wife's existence is not disproven by the above-ground one.

5 3 110

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 1d

I don't know what that means, nor do I wish to

3 15

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 1d

Primarily, that it's not to a woman chained to the floor in self-built underground bunker

22 60 390

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 1d

I have some bad news for JD Vance if he thinks violating the oath of office is "pretty criminal."

abcnews.go.com/Politics/pri...

59 190 1K

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 1d

Oh come on!

2 6