The Washington Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the state’s Attorney General, upholding a $35 million fine against Meta for willfully violating the state’s campaign disclosure law. The law requires media companies selling political advertising to disclose records of those ads when asked by a member of the public.

Background

Meta had argued that the law was unduly burdensome and infringed on its First Amendment rights. However, the court’s majority opinion, penned by Justice G. Helen Whitener, found that the law does not infringe on Meta’s First Amendment rights.

Three justices dissented, arguing that the fine was too high and that the law was burdensome. However, the majority opinion noted that other media companies, including local newspapers and TV stations, have complied with the disclosure rules for years without issue.

Meta’s actions in Washington state are similar to its actions in Canada, where it opposed a law requiring it to pay for news reports on its platforms. Instead of paying, Meta blocked news on its sites across the country.

Implications

The ruling has implications for the transparency of political advertising in Washington state. The state’s campaign disclosure law is designed to provide citizens with information about who is paying for political ads, and the court’s ruling upholds the importance of this law.

The case also highlights the ongoing debate over the role of social media companies in regulating political advertising. Meta’s actions in Washington state and Canada demonstrate the company’s willingness to push back against laws and regulations that it sees as burdensome or restrictive.

Original reporting: Renton Reporter — read the source article.