Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 18, 2023

NetChoice, LLC v. Bonta

Judge
Beth Freeman
Docket
5:22-cv-08861
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePreliminary Injunction
In one sentence

In NetChoice, LLC v. Bonta, Judge Freeman granted seven motions allowing proposed amicus briefs concerning NetChoice’s preliminary-injunction motion.

Who this affects

NetChoice, LLC, Rob Bonta, and the seven proposed amici whose motions to file briefs were granted.

What happened

NetChoice, LLC asked the court to consider a motion for a preliminary injunction. Seven groups and individuals asked for permission to file briefs offering information or arguments to assist the court.

The proposed amici included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Professor Eric Goldman, the Computer & Communications Industry Association, The New York Times Company, and others. The opinion says their briefs addressed issues in a case involving important public questions.

Judge Beth Labson Freeman found the briefs useful and granted all seven motions for permission to file them. The order also terminated the seven listed docket entries.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
NetChoice, LLC v. Bonta · No. 5:22-cv-08861
Judge
Beth Freeman
Date
Sept. 18, 2023

Background

The court received seven motions for permission to file amicus curiae briefs in connection with NetChoice, LLC’s motion for a preliminary injunction. An amicus curiae is a person or organization that is not a party but offers information or legal arguments that may assist the court.

The proposed briefs were submitted by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America; Professor Eric Goldman; Chamber of Progress, IP Justice, and LGBT Tech Institute; the Computer & Communications Industry Association; the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Reset Tech, Frances Haugen, and Former Government Officials; Fairplay and the Public Health Advocacy Institute; and The New York Times Company and the Student Press Law Center.

Court’s reasoning

The court said district courts have broad discretion to allow amici to participate and that there are no strict prerequisites for amicus status. It described the traditional role of amici as assisting in cases of general public interest, supplementing the parties’ efforts, and bringing relevant law to the court’s attention. The court stated that the briefs were useful and added to the arguments presented by the parties.

Disposition

The court granted all seven motions for leave to file amicus curiae briefs. The order also terminated docket entries 33, 34, 42, 45, 52, 53, and 56. Judge Beth Labson Freeman signed the order on September 18, 2023.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.