Page:Volokh v. James.pdf/2

 where that speech is offensive or repugnant, Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction, prohibiting enforcement of the law, is GRANTED.


 * I. Factual Background

The following facts are drawn from the Complaint, Plaintiffs’ declaration in support of their motion for preliminary injunction, and Defendant’s declaration in opposition to the motion, and the documents relied upon therein.
 * A.

Plaintiffs Eugene Volokh (“Volokh”), Rumble Canada Inc. (“Rumble”) and Locals Technology Inc. (“Locals”) operate online platforms that they believe are subject to the law as a “social medial network” as defined by the law. Plaintiff Volokh is a California resident and the co-owner and operator of the Volokh Conspiracy, a legal blog. (Compl., ECF No. 1 ¶ 12.) Plaintiff Rumble, headquartered in Toronto, Canada, operates a website “similar to YouTube” which “allows independent creators to upload and share video content”. (Id. ¶ 13.) Rumble has a “pro-free speech purpose” and its “mission [is] ‘to protect a free and open internet’ and to ‘create technologies that are immune to cancel culture.’” (Id.) Plaintiff Locals is a subsidiary of Rumble Inc. and operates a website that allows “creators to communicate and share content directly with unpaid and paid subscribers.” (Id. ¶ 14.) Locals also has a stated “pro-free speech purpose” and a “mission of being ‘committed to fostering a community that is safe, respectful, and dedicated to the free exchange of ideas.’” (Id.)
 * B.

On May 14, 2022, an avowed white supremacist used Twitch, a social media platform, to livestream himself perpetrating a racially motivated mass shooting on Black shoppers at a grocery