Yelp, Inc. v. State of Texas

A state government cannot regulate nationwide online speech just because a website happens to be accessible within its borders. 

This is the key issue in Yelp, Inc. v. State of Texas, which concerns whether Texas courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over an online platform based on speech published nationwide on the internet. The Texas Attorney General sued Yelp under the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act, alleging Yelp placed false or misleading consumer notices on its pages for crisis pregnancy centers, explaining that such centers typically do not provide certain medical services.

FIRE filed an amicus brief supporting Yelp, arguing Texas courts lack personal jurisdiction over the company. Because websites are accessible everywhere, our brief explains that treating general internet availability or nationwide business activity as evidence of “purposeful availment” would allow any state to assert jurisdiction over any online publisher. That rule would threaten free expression by exposing digital platforms to lawsuits anywhere users can view the platform’s content, encouraging online speakers to restrict access or to self-censor. That’s why we asked the Supreme Court of Texas to accept review of the state court of appeals decision that sustained the AG’s effort to exercise authority over Yelp, and reversed the trial court’s dismissal of the AG’s DTPA suit for lack of personal jurisdiction.