Twitter, Inc. v. Ken Paxton

facts were not yet developed, and because Twitter need not comply with the CID, could challenge it if it was enforced, and could have challenged the CID in Texas state court, Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.61(g). While Twitter could suffer hardship from withholding court consideration, adjudicating this case now would require determining whether Twitter * This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader.

TWITTER V. PAXTON

has violated Texas’s unfair trade practices law before OAG has a chance to complete its investigation. Any hardship to Twitter from the alleged chill of its First Amendment rights was insufficient to overcome the uncertainty of the legal issue presented in the case in its current posture.

COUNSEL

Peter G. Neiman (argued), Alex W. Miller, and Rishita Apsani, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, New York, New York; Mark D. Flanagan, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Palo Alto, California; Patrick J. Carome, Ari Holtzblatt, Anuradha Sivaram, and Susan Pelletier, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Washington, D.C.; for…