Md. AG Seeks Dismissal in Age-Appropriate Design Code Suit
Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown (D) on Monday asked for the dismissal of a lawsuit from NetChoice over the state’s Age-Appropriate Design Code (MAADC) Act, arguing that the trade association failed to state a claim and lacked jurisdiction.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Given the standard set in Moody v. NetChoice, First Amendment claims must be brought individually by NetChoice’s members to establish standing, and they must “plead and prove that they suffered an injury in fact,” said a Maryland memorandum supporting dismissal. NetChoice “offers only broad, conclusory assertions that at least some members ‘curate and disseminate compilations of protected speech on their services, [that] are protected by the First Amendment,’” which “are plainly insufficient to show that any individual member ‘ha[s] standing to sue in their own right.’”
Additionally, “all of NetChoice’s First Amendment claims fail because the Kids Code does not regulate protected speech,” Brown said. “Rather, the Kids Code is a consumer protection law that regulates the conduct of companies that engage in commercial endeavors.”
Case 25-00322 began in early February when NetChoice sued Brown, alleging the MAADC restricts free speech and invades privacy through age-verification requirements (see 2502030065). The trade association is involved in some 16 lawsuits against state attorneys general over legislation the group feels is unconstitutional (see 2503310040).