In a significant effort to safeguard freedom of speech, Elon Musk’s X Corp has initiated legal action against the contentious anti-Trump New York Attorney General Letitia James, aiming to halt the so-called ‘Stop Hiding Hate Act’ on the grounds of a First Amendment infringement. This highly unconstitutional statute mandates social media platforms to reveal their content moderation policies and to report instances of hate speech and disinformation removals.
X contends that this legislation forces unconstitutional disclosures of speech, resembling a California law that has been partially obstructed by the Ninth Circuit. Advocates of this Orwellian speech regulation include Governor Kathy Hochul and the Anti-Defamation League.
For context, Letitia James has engaged in legal pursuits against the president, including a civil fraud case intended to inflict financial damage upon him. Following the 2024 election, James extended her congratulations to President Trump on his victory but cautioned that her office was ‘prepared to fight back’ against his America First agenda.
In response to the contentious law, X Corp stated, ‘Defining the boundaries of acceptable discourse online engenders considerable debate among reasonable people about where to draw the correct proverbial line,’ as noted in its filing to Reuters. ‘This is not a role that the government may play.’
In support of the controversial legislation, New York Governor Kathy Hochul remarked, ‘[The Stop Hiding Hate Act] provides consumers with the transparency and security they require and deserve.’ Expanding on this notion, Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal remarked, ‘The fact that Elon Musk would go to such lengths to evade disclosing straightforward information to New Yorkers illustrates the necessity of this law.’
As previously reported, Letitia James has a longstanding history of pursuing legal actions against Elon Musk. As noted, her most recent outburst commenced with typical anti-Trump rhetoric. She stated, ‘We prepared in anticipation of Donald Trump winning this election; we examined Project 2025, we considered jurisdiction, we evaluated venue, we assessed a wide array of issues, which is why, when he filed his first executive order regarding birthright c
Continuing her peculiar tirade, the Democrat stated, “We initiated legal action concerning probationary employees, specifically those probationary employees who were dismissed. We achieved victory. We took legal action against the NHI, the National Health Institute. We succeeded in obtaining a preliminary injunction.”
Concluding her progressive discourse, Letitia James lamented, “We initiated legal action regarding the dismantling of the Department of Education. We were triumphant. We secured a temporary restraining order concerning the education grants. I could elaborate indefinitely. The crux of the matter is that we are prevailing.”
In yet another nonsensical outburst, she ironically criticized Musk for breaching the law, asserting, “They have overstepped their authority, and it is crucial that attorneys general representing our respective States take a stand and uphold the rule of law.” She further remarked, “Because Elon Musk, individuals at the Treasury, and the President of the United States are not above the law, and we will persist.”
