Page:Volokh v. James.pdf/15

 Although preventing and reducing the instances of hate-fueled mass shootings is certainly a compelling governmental interest, the law is not narrowly tailored toward that end. Banning conduct that incites violence is not protected by the First Amendment, but this law goes far beyond that.

While the OAG Investigative Report does make a link between misinformation on the internet and the radicalization of the Buffalo mass shooter (Sawyer, [sic] Decl., Ex. A, ECF No. 20-1 at 23–26), even if the law was truly aimed at reducing the instances of hate-fueled mass shootings, the law is not narrowly tailored toward reaching that goal. It is unclear what, if any, effect a mechanism that allows users to report hateful conduct on social media networks would have on reducing mass shootings, especially when the law does not even require that social media networks affirmatively respond to any complaints of “hateful conduct”. In other words, it is hard to see how the law really changes the status quo—where some social media networks choose to identify and remove hateful content and others do not.