Paxton

Twitter, Inc. v. Paxton

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 11, 20213:21-cv-01644California2,283 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

20 In its Complaint, Twitter, which "operates an online platform where users can 21 share short messages ('Tweets') and other content" (see Compl. ¶ 2), alleges it has 22 established "content moderation policies, practices, and techniques that, among other 23 things, are designed to minimize the reach of harmful or misleading information" posted 24 25 1 Twitter has filed a motion for preliminary injunction, which Paxton has opposed. 26 To the extent the parties, in those filings, address the issues presented in the motion to dismiss, the Court has considered those arguments as well. 27 on its platform (see Compl. ¶ 15). Twitter further alleges that, "in the months surrounding the January 6, 2021[,] attack on the United States Capitol, Twitter decided to suspend or restrict numerous accounts for violating its policies against glorifying or inciting violence, and against manipulating or interfering in elections or other civic processes," that "[a]mong the users whose accounts were permanently suspended in the immediate aftermath of the deadly attack was President Donald Trump" (see Compl. ¶ 2), and that Paxton, the Attorney General…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.