Institute For Free Speech

Free Speech Arguments

Presented by the Institute for Free Speech

The Free Speech Arguments Podcast brings you oral arguments from important First Amendment free political speech cases across the country. Find us on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

Episode 38: State of Washington v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

State of Washington v. Meta Platforms, Inc., argued before the Supreme Court of Washington on October 28, 2025. Argued by Robert McKenna (on behalf of Meta Platforms, Inc.) and Cristina Sepe, Deputy Solicitor General of the State of Washington (on behalf of State of Washington) .

Background of the case, from the Supplemental Brief of Petitioner Meta:

The campaign finance law at issue here has made it irrational and unworkable for digital platforms to carry political ads targeting Washington state and local elections. Major platforms have banned these ads as a result. The law tips the scales against disempowered political actors who need low-cost but effective digital advertising to communicate with voters. And the State has failed to justify that result under the First Amendment.

In 2018, the State expanded the Fair Campaign Practices Act (FCPA) to impose burdensome disclosure obligations on “digital communication platforms.” The State now requires such platforms to maintain extensive information about any advertisement in the last five years that constitutes “political advertising,” and disclose this information upon request to any person or entity—anywhere in the world and at any time—within two business days. Candidates and campaigns, meanwhile, have less demanding disclosure obligations.

And even minor noncompliance carries significant penalties for platforms: Based on its failure to timely satisfy 12 requests for information from just three individuals, Meta faces a $35 million judgment. There is no reason for Meta—or any other platform operator—to incur the threat of massive penalties (and high compliance costs), by continuing to carry ads that provide very little revenue. It is no surprise, then, that Meta and others banned Washington political ads from their platforms.

Statement of the Issues, from the Supplemental Brief of Petitioner Meta:

  1. Whether the FCPA and implementing regulations violate the First Amendment because they impose unjustifiable burdens on digital communication platforms and fail to further the State’s purported interest in educating its electorate about political ad purchasers and their expenditures through narrowly tailored means. See RCW 42.17A.345(1); WAC 390-18-050 (together, “disclosure law”).
  2. Whether a penalty imposed for violating the disclosure law’s obligation to provide responsive information “promptly upon request” should be calculated based on the number of requests or the number of ads subject to each request.
  3. Whether a $35 million judgment against Meta for failing to respond to 12 requests with every piece of required information within two business days is an unconstitutionally excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment.

Resources:

Listen to the argument here: 

     

The Institute for Free Speech promotes and defends the political speech rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government guaranteed by the First Amendment. If you’re enjoying the Free Speech Arguments podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on your preferred podcast platform.

Episode 37: Chiles v. Salazar, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on October 7, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 36: Center for Arizona Policy, et al. v. Arizona Secretary of State, et al., argued before the Arizona Supreme Court on September 11, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 35: Gays Against Groomers, et al. v. Garcia, et al., argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit on September 10, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 34: Moving Oxnard Forward, Inc. v. Lourdes Lopez, argued en banc before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on September 9, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 33: Lowery v. Mills, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on August 4, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 32: OPAWL – Building AAPI Feminist Leadership v. Dave Yost, et al., argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on July 23, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 31: Libby, et al. v. Fecteau, et al., argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on June 5, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 30: Americans for Prosperity, et al. v. Meyer, et al., argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on May 15, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 29: Institute for Free Speech v. J.R. Johnson, et al., argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on April 28, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 28: Associated Press v. Taylor Budowich, argued before a three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit on April 17, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 27: Local 8027, AFT-New Hampshire, AFL-CIO v. Edelblut, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on April 8, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 26: Parents Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District, argued before the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on March 19, 2025
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 25: Powell, et al. v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission, argued en banc before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on February 13, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 24: Henderson v. Springfield R-12 School District, argued en banc before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on January 15, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 23: Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on January 15, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 22: TikTok Inc. v. Merrick Garland, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on January 10, 2025.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 21: Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Secretary United States Department of HHS, consolidated under AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP et al v. Secretary United States Department of HHS, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on October 30, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 20: Moms for Liberty – Wilson County, TN, et al. v. Wilson County Board of Education, et al., argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on October 29, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 19: Central Maine Power Company, et al. v. Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices, et al., argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on October 9, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 18: Little, et al. v. Llano County, et al., argued en banc before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on September 24, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 17: TikTok Inc. v. Merrick Garland, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on September 16, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 16: NetChoice, LLC v. Bonta, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on July 17, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 15: X Corp. v. Bonta, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on July 17, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 14: The Imperial Sovereign Court of the State of Montana v. Knudsen, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on June 4, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 13: Can You Be Punished for Sharing Publicly Broadcast Court Hearings (Somberg v. McDonald), argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on June 12, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 12: Florida’s STOP Woke Act in Higher Education (Pernell v. Lamb), argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on June 14, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 11: National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al., argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit sitting en banc on June 12, 2024. 
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 10: U.S. v. Sittenfeld, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on May 9, 2024
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 9: Diei v. Boyd, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on May 2, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 8: Spectrum WT v. Wendler, argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on April 29, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 7: Joseph W. Fischer v. United States, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on April 16, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 6: U.S. v. Mackey, argued before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on April 5, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 5: Gilliam v. Gerregano, argued before the Supreme Court of Tennessee on April 3, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 4: Gonzalez v. Trevino, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on March 20, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 3: Murthy v. Missouri, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on March 18, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:   

Episode 2: NRA v. Vullo, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on March 18, 2024.
Listen to the argument here:  

Episode 1: Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on February 26, 2024
Listen to the argument here:  

Get the Latest Updates

© 2025 Institute for Free Speech | 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW | Suite 801 | Washington, DC 20036 | 202-301-3300

The word mark Institute for Free Speech® and its logo of a stylized lantern with a flame are federally registered service marks and are owned by the Institute for Free Speech.