Armslist LLC v. Facebook, Inc.

Summary

The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed dismissal of claims by Armslist LLC, Torquelist LLC, and related individuals alleging that Facebook and Instagram violated their free-speech rights under Article I, Section 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution by removing or restricting their accounts. The court held that the complaint did not sufficiently allege state action based on pressure from members of Congress and rejected the argument that the platforms were de facto public forums. The court affirmed the trial court’s order sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the claims with prejudice.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to allege that Facebook's or Instagram's actions could be attributed to Pennsylvania state action. Allegations that federal legislators criticized the platforms, requested policy changes, threatened possible future federal regulation, or proposed legislation did not plausibly establish coercion or significant encouragement sufficient to make the platforms' private conduct the conduct of the Commonwealth.
2. The complaint did not state a Pennsylvania constitutional claim based on a de facto public-forum theory. Commonwealth v. Tate does not extend to privately owned social-media platforms where no criminal prosecution or statutory defense to trespass is involved.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint adequately alleged that Facebook and Instagram were state actors under Article I, Section 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution because members of Congress coerced or significantly encouraged them to restrict or remove appellants' accounts.
2. Whether Facebook's and Instagram's privately owned social-media platforms were de facto public forums under Pennsylvania law such that restricting or removing appellants' accounts violated their Pennsylvania constitutional free-speech rights.

Disposition

affirmed