California governor vetoes bill dubbed 'Israel tax' by critics

Gavin Newsom, the governor of California and a likely 2028 Democratic presidential contender, vetoed a bill on Monday that would have required social media companies to pay fines every time their algorithms promoted posts deemed violent or discriminatory.

The state's legislature pressed ahead with Senate Bill 771 (SB 771) with a particular focus on rooting out antisemitism, and in response to looser regulations online since the election of US President Donald Trump, who had accused media companies across the board of being too left-leaning, and of censoring right-wing voices.

Most Republicans in the California State Senate voted against the bill. 

"I support the author's goal of ensuring that our nation-leading civil rights laws apply equally both online and offline. I likewise share the author's concern about the growth of discriminatory threats, violence, and coercive harassment online," Newsom wrote in his letter to the legislature.

"I am concerned, however, that this bill is premature. Our first step should be to determine if, and to what extent, existing civil rights laws are sufficient to address violations perpetrated through algorithms. To the extent our laws prove inadequate, they should be bolstered at that time. For this reason, I cannot sign this bill," he said. 

SB 771 featured fines as high as $1m if a post caused direct harm to a user. 

But it was also unclear to what extent potentially threatening language or images would be credible enough to warrant an investigation and subsequent punitive measures. 

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (Fire) said it is especially difficult to prove the intent to cause harm.

"Nobody seriously alleges large social media platforms create content delivery algorithms with the express intent of facilitating civil rights violations - rendering liability for aiding and abetting civil rights violations through social media algorithms all but impossible under existing law." 

In a statement, the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (Cair-CA) welcomed the governor's action.

"Without clear definitions and explicit constitutional protections, the measure would pressure social media companies to over-censor their users, particularly Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian Californians," Cair-CA said. "This veto affirms that the solution to online hate cannot come at the cost of silencing communities who are already disproportionately targeted."

'Israel tax'

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) said the bill would have specifically suppressed anti-Israel speech and targeted pro-Palestine voices.

The organisation called Newsom's veto a "decisive victory for the First Amendment" because the bill would have employed the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, and used it "to police lawful speech about Israel and Palestine".

Trump administration reverses new guidelines tying Fema funds to Israeli boycotts

Read More »

The IHRA's working definition of antisemitism reads as follows: 

"Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities."

The non-legally binding definition is accompanied by a list of 11 "illustrations" of antisemitism, which the IHRA says are intended to "guide" it in its work.

These examples include making claims that Jews control the media and the economy, denying the Holocaust, and accusing Jews of being more loyal to Israel than their own countries.

For months, the ADC had mobilised a national coalition of more than 60 organisations across civil rights, labour, tech, and community sectors to push back against SB 771.

"By threatening social media platforms with million-dollar fines if they do not enforce politically motivated rules, SB 771 would have acted as an ‘Israel Tax,’ coercing compliance with the powerful Israel Lobby at the expense of free expression and triggering costly lawsuits to the state that would have been paid for by California’s taxpayers," Ellie Yousif, ADC's national advocacy and communications manager said in a statement.