AB895: Bill Text

AB895,,1 2023 ASSEMBLY BILL 895

January 4, 2024 - Introduced by Representatives Sortwell, Behnke, Goeben, Murphy, Schmidt and Schraa. Referred to Committee on Judiciary.

AB895,,2 An Act to create 895.053 of the statutes; relating to: creating a civil cause of action against the owner or operator of a social media website that restricts religious or political speech.

AB895,,3 Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau

This bill creates a civil cause of action against the owner or operator of a social media website that is available to the public and that has more than 150 million users, if the owner or operator of the website intentionally does any of the following:

1. Deletes or censors, or uses an algorithm to delete, censor, disfavor, or censure, the religious speech or political speech of a person that is a resident of this state, as defined in the bill, and that subscribes to or has an account with the social media website (a user). The bill defines “religious speech” as “speech relating to a set of unproven answers, truth claims, faith-based assumptions, and naked assertions that attempt to explain such greater questions as how the world was created, what constitutes right and wrong actions by individuals, and what happens after death.” The bill defines “political speech” as “speech relating to the state, government, body politic, or public administration as it relates to governmental policy or policy making,” including speech by the government or a candidate for office and any discussion of social issues.

2. Fails to notify a user that the user’s religious speech or political speech has been deleted, censored, disfavored, or censured, or that the user has been deplatformed. The bill defines “deplatforming” as deleting or banning a user from the social media website for more than 60 days.

3. Fails to allow a user who has been deplatformed to access or retrieve all of the user’s information, content, material, and data for at least 60 days after being deplatformed.

4. Fails to publish the standards, including detailed definitions, that it uses or has used for determining how to delete, censor, disfavor, and censure speech on the social media website and how to deplatform and shadow ban users on the social media website. The bill defines “shadow banning” as limiting or eliminating the exposure of a user, or content posted by a user, to other users of the social media website.

5. Applies censorship, deplatforming, and shadow banning standards in a manner that is not consistent among its users on the social media website.

6. Fails to inform each user about any changes to the social media website’s user rules, terms, and agreements.

7. Makes changes to its user rules, terms, and agreements more than once every 180 days.

8. Fails to provide a mechanism for a user to request the number of other users who were provided or shown the user’s content or posts and provide that number to the user upon request.

The bill provides that it is not a defense to such an action that an owner or operator of the social media website considered a user’s religious speech or political speech to be related to content that is offensive on the basis of the owner’s or operator’s personal moral code.

In addition to a user’s cause of action, the bill authorizes the attorney general or any district attorney to bring a civil cause of action on behalf of the user or on behalf of the state, or both, with respect to an owner’s or operator’s intentional censorship of a user’s religious speech or political speech. Each party may bring a cause of action independently from or in conjunction with one another.

If a user, the attorney general, or a district attorney prevails in a civil action, the court may award all of the following relief:

1. Any economic and noneconomic damages suffered by the user, which are awarded to the user regardless of whether the user participated in the action.

2. Statutory damages in an amount of not less than $75,000 for each intentional act described in items 1 to 8 above. Statutory damages related to intentional censorship are awarded to the state if the attorney general or a district attorney is a prevailing party. Statutory damages related to other intentional acts are awarded to the user if a prevailing party.

3. If aggravating factors are present, punitive damages. Any punitive damages are awarded to the state if the attorney general or a district attorney is a prevailing party.

4. Injunctive relief.

Regardless of who prevails in the civil action, the court may award the prevailing party costs and reasonable attorney fees but may not assess costs or attorney fees against the state.

The bill creates certain exceptions to liability for owners and operators of social media websites. For example, an owner or operator is not liable for actions in relation to speech that calls for immediate acts of violence, that is obscene or pornographic in nature, or that entices criminal conduct.

For further information see the state fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.

AB895,,4 The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do enact as follows:

AB895,1 Section 1. 895.053 of the statutes is created to read:

AB895,,6 895.053 Social media censorship; action for. (1) Definitions. In this section:

AB895,,7 (a) “Algorithm” means a set of instructions designed to perform a specific task.

AB895,,8 (b) “Deplatform” means to delete or ban a user from a social media website for more than 60 days.

AB895,,9 (c) “Hate speech” means speech concerning content that a person finds offensive on the basis of the person’s personal moral code.

AB895,,10 (d) “Obscene” means that all of the following apply to content:

AB895,,11 1. An average individual, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the content, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.

AB895,,12 2. The content depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way.

AB895,,13 3. The content, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

AB895,,14 (e) “Political speech” means speech relating to the state, government, body politic, or public administration as it relates to governmental policy or policy making. “Political speech” includes speech by the government or a candidate for office and any discussion of social issues.

AB895,,15 (f) “Religious speech” means speech relating to a set of unproven answers, truth claims, faith-based assumptions, and naked assertions that attempt to explain such greater questions as how the world was created, what constitutes right and wrong actions by individuals, and what happens after death.

AB895,,16 (g) “Shadow ban” means to limit or eliminate the exposure of a user, or content or material posted by a user, to other users of the social media website through any means, regardless of whether the action is determined by an individual or an algorithm, and regardless of whether the action is readily apparent to a user. “Shadow ban” does not include any action towards content or material that is viewed by a user if the action is taken at the request of that user.

AB895,,17 (h) “Social media website” means a website or application that enables users to communicate with each other by posting information, comments, messages, or images and to which all of the following apply:

AB895,,18 1. The website or application is available to the public.

AB895,,19 2. The website or application has more than 150 million users.

AB895,,20 (i) “User” means a person that subscribes to or has an account with a social media website and to whom any of the following applies:

AB895,,21 1. The person is an individual who is a U.S. citizen and has resided in this state for at least 28 consecutive days before the deletion, censoring, disfavoring, or censuring that is the basis of the person’s cause of action under sub. (2).

AB895,,22 2. The person is not an individual and the person has its commercial domicile, as defined in s. 71.22 (1g), in this state.

AB895,,23 (2) Cause of action. Except as provided in sub. (6), a user of a social media website has a civil cause of action against the owner or operator of the social media website if the owner or operator intentionally does any of the following:

AB895,,24 (a) Deletes or censors the user’s religious speech or political speech on the social media website.

AB895,,25 (b) Uses an algorithm to delete, censor, disfavor, or censure the user’s religious speech or political speech on the social media website.

AB895,,26 (c) Fails to notify a user that the user’s religious speech or political speech has been deleted, censored, disfavored, or censured or that the user has been deplatformed.

AB895,,27 (d) Fails to allow a user who has been deplatformed to access or retrieve all of the user’s information, content, material, and data for at least 60 days after being deplatformed.

AB895,,28 (e) Fails to publish the standards, including detailed definitions, that it uses or has used for determining how to delete, censor, disfavor, and censure the speech of users on the social media website and how to deplatform and shadow ban users on the social media website.

AB895,,29 (f) Applies censorship, deplatforming, and shadow banning standards in a manner that is not consistent among its users on the social media website.

AB895,,30 (g) Fails to inform each user about any changes to the social media website’s user rules, terms, and agreements.

AB895,,31 (h) Makes changes to its user rules, terms, and agreements more than once every 180 days.

AB895,,32 (i) Fails to provide a mechanism for a user to request the number of other users who were provided or shown the user’s content or posts and provide that number to the user upon request.

AB895,,33 (3) Unavailable defense. It is not a defense to an action brought under this section that the owner or operator of a social media website considered a user’s religious speech or political speech to be hate speech.

AB895,,34 (4) Enforcement by attorney general or district attorneys. (a) If the owner or operator of a social media website intentionally censors a user’s religious speech or political speech as described under sub. (2) (a), in addition and supplementary to the user’s cause of action that exists under sub. (2), the attorney general or any district attorney, on behalf of the user or on behalf of the state or both, may commence and maintain an action with respect to the intentional censorship, separately or in conjunction with an action brought under sub. (2) or under this paragraph.

AB895,,35 (b) In an action under this section, the user who has the cause of action under sub. (2), the attorney general, or any district attorney may intervene in the action as a matter of right.