Elon Musk's X sues New York to block content moderation law
NEW YORK :Elon Musk's X Corp sued New York on Tuesday, challenging the constitutionality of a state law requiring social media companies to disclose how they monitor hate speech, extremism, disinformation, harassment and foreign political interference.
In a complaint filed in Manhattan federal court, X said New York's law subjects it to lawsuits and potentially large fines unless it discloses "highly sensitive and controversial speech" that the First Amendment protects and the state may dislike.
X said New York's law was based on a nearly identical California law whose enforcement was partially blocked by a federal appeals court last September because of free speech concerns.
The lawsuit quoted a letter from two legislators who sponsored the law, which said X and Musk in particular had a "disturbing record" on content moderation "that threatens the foundations of our democracy."
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who enforces the state's laws, is the named defendant in X's lawsuit. Her office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
34 minutes ago
- CNA
Trump extends TikTok deadline for third time
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump will this week give TikTok a fresh 90-day extension to find a non-Chinese buyer, the White House said on Tuesday (Jun 17), the third time he has put off a threatened ban on the popular app. A federal law requiring TikTok's sale or ban on national security grounds was due to take effect the day before Trump's January inauguration. "President Trump will sign an additional Executive Order this week to keep TikTok up and running. As he has said many times, President Trump does not want TikTok to go dark," Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. "This extension will last 90 days, which the administration will spend working to ensure this deal is closed so that the American people can continue to use TikTok with the assurance that their data is safe and secure." Trump, whose 2024 election campaign relied heavily on social media, has previously said he is fond of the video-sharing app. DIGITAL COLD WAR? Trump said at the time that a group of purchasers was ready to pay TikTok owner ByteDance "a lot of money" for the video-clip-sharing sensation's US operations. Trump has repeatedly downplayed risks that TikTok is in danger, saying he remains confident of finding a buyer for the app's US business. The president is "just not motivated to do anything about TikTok," said independent analyst Rob Enderle. "Unless they get on his bad side, TikTok is probably going to be in pretty good shape." Trump had long supported a ban or divestment, but reversed his position and vowed to defend the platform after coming to believe it helped him win young voters' support in the November election. Motivated by national security fears and belief in Washington that TikTok is controlled by the Chinese government, the ban took effect on Jan 19, one day before Trump's inauguration, with ByteDance having made no attempt to find a suitor. TikTok "has become a symbol of the US-China tech rivalry; a flashpoint in the new Cold War for digital control," said Shweta Singh, an assistant professor of information systems at Warwick Business School in Britain. The Republican president announced an initial 75-day delay of the ban upon taking office. A second extension pushed the deadline to Jun 19. TARIFF TURMOIL Trump said in April that China would have agreed to a deal on the sale of TikTok if it were not for a dispute over his tariffs on Beijing. ByteDance has confirmed talks with the US government, saying key matters needed to be resolved and that any deal would be "subject to approval under Chinese law". Possible solutions reportedly include seeing existing US investors in ByteDance roll over their stakes into a new independent global TikTok company. Additional US investors, including Oracle and private equity firm Blackstone, would be brought on to reduce ByteDance's share in the new TikTok. Much of TikTok's US activity is already housed on Oracle servers, and the company's chairman, Larry Ellison, is a longtime Trump ally. Uncertainty remains, particularly over what would happen to TikTok's valuable algorithm. "TikTok without its algorithm is like Harry Potter without his wand – it's simply not as powerful," said Forrester Principal Analyst Kelsey Chickering. Meanwhile, it appears TikTok is continuing with business as usual.
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
Commentary: The myth of the suppressed Chinese consumer
NEW YORK: The great half-truth about China is that its economy consumes too little and invests too much. Over-investment is a real problem, but underconsumption is not. So the mounting calls on the country to 'rebalance' by encouraging more consumer spending are misguided. In the standard telling, China set out to become a manufacturing power in the 1980s and has since suppressed spending by consumers, so it could pour their savings into building ports and factories. But the suppressed consumer is a myth. So far this century, in real terms, private consumer spending in China has grown more than 8 per cent a year, faster than in any other economy – by far. Over the past few years, consumer spending growth has slowed in most countries, due to ageing populations and falling real incomes, and it has fallen in China as well to 5 per cent a year. But that is still higher than in any other major economy except Turkey, where consumption was boosted by a credit boom and refugee inflows. The myth rests in good part on the consumption share of China's gross domestic product, which is just 40 per cent – well below the global norm. But the reason for this anomaly is not that consumption has grown slowly, it is that the other big component of GDP, investment – in infrastructure, real estate, export industries – has grown even faster, averaging 10 per cent a year in this century. That pace, too, is the fastest for any major economy by a significant margin. Corrected for this long-term pattern of over-investment, the consumption share of China's GDP would be around 55 per cent, closer to normal. Consumer spending has also grown much faster in China than in established and newer Asian manufacturing powers, from Japan and South Korea to Indonesia and Malaysia. And when the original miracle economies were reaching the level of development in China today, they too saw sharp slowdowns in consumer spending growth. Yet, somehow, calls to free the Chinese consumer persist alongside mounting evidence of the steady growth in their spending. It's difficult to spot symptoms of repression among the Chinese shoppers in luxury stores from Shanghai to Paris. Drill down into consumer spending, and growth looks to be weakening mainly for services, not goods. But this, too, is partly illusory. If one factors in services provided by China's government at little or no charge, including healthcare and education, consumption rises significantly as a share of GDP. CONSUMPTION VS INVESTMENT Investment, on the other hand, is clearly excessive at 40 per cent of GDP and roughly equal to consumption. In a typical economy, investment is lower than consumption as a share of GDP but more important to the economic cycle. Consumers can't stop spending on necessities in a downturn but businesses can stop investing, at least for a while. This binge has been extreme. Only 10 countries have ever seen investment peak above 40 per cent of GDP, briefly. At that level, so much capital flows to unnecessary projects that the binge tends to reverse quickly, slowing growth. China, uniquely, has managed by debt engineering to keep investment above that for two decades now. Relentless over-investment is fuelling tension with trading partners, since China ends up exporting a lot of its excess production and breeding dysfunction at home. Over time, such binges tend to divert capital into less productive targets such as real estate – which helps explain China's debt-soaked property market today. The outsiders urging China to focus instead on the consumer can cite genuine 'structural' obstacles to their spending. Internal migration controls block many rural Chinese from moving to higher paying urban jobs. Meagre pensions compel many workers to save for retirement rather than spend. The weakening real estate market and other negative 'wealth effects' further discourage spending. China's leaders seem to be heeding some of this advice. An 'action plan' announced in March promised to 'vigorously boost consumption', but so far the action has been light on structural reform and heavy on subsidies for purchases of goods such as home appliances – which have only a passing effect. Consumers rushing to buy rice cookers now won't be buying them in coming years. China's consumer spending has been growing at a world-beating pace and doesn't have much room to accelerate, particularly not when many households are deep in debt. That debt has tripled in the past 15 years to over 60 per cent of GDP, among the highest in emerging markets and close to that in the heavily consumer-driven US economy. The country can't solve the real problems caused by over-investment – from geopolitical tensions to dysfunction at home – by attacking the phantom problem of underconsumption. The crux of the imbalance is that the state has been pushing too much investment for too long in the name of hitting its inflated growth target, now set at 5 per cent. The answer is not to shift the focus of state meddling to boosting consumption. It is to accept that China is weighed down by a shrinking population, declining productivity and a huge debt load. It has a real potential growth rate closer to 2.5 per cent than 5 per cent. And as growth slows to a more realistic pace, consumption will naturally expand as a share of the economy.
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
US Senate passes stablecoin bill in milestone for crypto industry
The U.S. Senate on Tuesday passed a bill to create a regulatory framework for U.S.-dollar-pegged cryptocurrency tokens known as stablecoins, in a watershed moment for the digital asset industry. The bill, dubbed the GENIUS Act, received bipartisan support, with several Democrats joining most Republicans to back the proposed federal rules. The House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans, needs to pass its version of the bill before it heads to President Donald Trump's desk for approval. "It is a major milestone," said Andrew Olmem, a managing partner at law firm Mayer Brown and the former deputy director of the National Economic Council during Trump's first term. "It establishes, for the first time, a regulatory regime for stablecoins, a rapidly developing financial product and industry." Stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency designed to maintain a constant value, usually a 1:1 dollar peg, are commonly used by crypto traders to move funds between tokens. Their use has grown rapidly in recent years, and proponents say that they could be used to send payments instantly. If signed into law, the stablecoin bill would require tokens to be backed by liquid assets - such as U.S. dollars and short-term Treasury bills - and for issuers to publicly disclose the composition of their reserves on a monthly basis. The crypto industry has long pushed for lawmakers to pass legislation creating rules for digital assets, arguing that a clear framework could enable stablecoins to become more widely used. The sector spent more than $119 million backing pro-crypto congressional candidates in last year's elections and had tried to paint the issue as bipartisan. The House of Representatives passed a stablecoin bill last year but the Senate - in which Democrats held the majority at the time - did not take that bill up, and it died. Trump has sought to broadly overhaul U.S. cryptocurrency policies after courting cash from the industry during his presidential campaign. Bo Hines, who leads Trump's Council of Advisers on Digital Assets, has said the White House wants a stablecoin bill passed before August. Tensions on Capitol Hill over Trump's various crypto ventures at one point threatened to derail the digital asset sector's hope of legislation this year as Democrats have grown increasingly frustrated with Trump and his family members promoting their personal crypto projects. Trump's crypto ventures include a meme coin called $TRUMP, launched in January, and a business called World Liberty Financial, a crypto company owned partly by the president. The White House has said there are no conflicts of interest present for Trump and that his assets are in a trust managed by his children. Other Democrats expressed concern that the bill would not prevent big tech companies from issuing their own private stablecoins, and argued that legislation needed stronger anti-money laundering protections and prohibitions on foreign stablecoin issuers. "A bill that turbocharges the stablecoin market, while facilitating the president's corruption and undermining national security, financial stability, and consumer protection is worse than no bill at all," said Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat, in remarks on the Senate floor in May.
