State Senate: Democratic majority
State House: Republican majority
Governor: Glenn Youngkin (R)
Attorney General: Jason Miyares (R)
Summary:
The Commonwealth of Virginia remains a purple state with a split between control of the General Assembly and the governor and Attorney General’s offices. In the Virginia Senate, Democrats hold a narrow majority with 21 seats out of 40. In the House of Delegates, Democrats have secured at least 51 out of 100 seats, flipping control from Republicans in their most recent odd-year election.
In 2019 Del. Mark Cole [R] introduced one of the nation’s first social media anti-censorship bills, but it did not become law. More recently, the General Assembly has considered several measures to regulate and limit the use of AI and ‘deepfakes’, limit social media use by minors, and define anti-semitism in statute, only the last of which became law. Meanwhile, Republican AG Jason Miyares has joined and led several nationwide efforts against Big Tech and the Biden Administration.
Key Policymakers:
Legislative Activity:
HB 2635 (2019): One of the first social media anti-censorship bills. Requires the State Corporation Commission to regulate as a public service corporation any social media website that is open to the public, that has more than 75 million subscribers, and that is not specifically affiliated with any one religion or political party from its inception. The measure prohibits such a website from using an assertion, opinion, or belief that religious or political speech constitutes hate speech as a basis for deleting or censoring a user’s religious or political speech. The measure authorizes any user of such a regulated website to bring a civil action against its owner for intentionally deleting or censoring the user’s religious or political speech in which the user may recover damages and attorney fees and costs. Introduced by Del. Mark Cole [R] in Jan. 2019 but did not progress.
HB 1606 (Signed into Law): Provides that the Commonwealth adopts the non-legally binding Working Definition of Antisemitism adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance on May 26, 2016, including the contemporary examples of antisemitism set forth therein, exclusively as a tool and guide for training, education, recognizing, and combating antisemitic hate crimes or discrimination and for tracking and reporting antisemitic incidents in the Commonwealth. Introduced by Del. Anne Ferrell Tata [R] in Jan. 2023. Passed the Senate unanimously and the House with a large bipartisan majority and signed into law in March 2023.
SB 1184: Hate crimes and discrimination; anti-Semitism; penalties. Provides that it is the policy of the Commonwealth to safeguard all individuals within the Commonwealth from unlawful discrimination in employment and in places of public accommodation because of such individual’s ethnic origin. The bill also adds victims who are intentionally selected because of their ethnic origin to the categories of victims whose intentional selection for a hate crime involving assault, assault and battery, or trespass for the purpose of damaging another’s property results in a higher criminal penalty for the offense. The bill also provides that no provider or user of an interactive computer service on the Internet shall be liable for any action voluntarily taken by it in good faith to restrict access to material that the provider or user considers to be intended to incite hatred on the basis of ethnic origin. Introduced by Sen. Bryce Reeves [R] in Jan. 2023 and passed the Senate but was blocked by a unanimous House vote.
SB 164: Virginia Consumer Protection Act; prohibited practices; artificial intelligence disclosure. Prohibits the dissemination or sale of an item created with artificial intelligence technology that contains a videographic or still image intending to depict an actual person or an audio or audio-visual recording intending to depict the voice of an actual person where the creator has not disclosed the use of artificial intelligence technology. Introduced by Sen. Bryce Reeves [R] in Jan. 2024 and voted favorably out of committee in Feb.
HB 697/SB 571: Expands the applicability of provisions related to defamation, slander, and libel to include synthetic media, defined in the bill. The bill makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor for any person to use any synthetic media for the purpose of committing any criminal offense involving fraud, constituting a separate and distinct offense with punishment separate and apart from any punishment received for the commission of the primary criminal offense. The bill also authorizes the individual depicted in the synthetic media to bring a civil action against the person who violates such prohibition to recover actual damages, reasonable attorney fees, and such other relief as the court determines to be appropriate. The bill directs the Attorney General to convene a work group to study and make recommendations on the current enforcement of laws related to the use of synthetic media, including deepfakes, and any further action needed to address the issue of such use in fraudulent acts. Introduced by Del. Michelle Maldonado [D], Sen. Adam Ebbin [D] and Del. Irene Shin [D] in Jan. 2024, passed unanimously and sent to the Senate.
HB 747: Creates operating standards for developers and deployers of high-risk artificial intelligence systems, as those terms are defined in the bill, relating to artificial intelligence. Developers must disclose system details to deployers, who, in turn, must implement risk management policies and conduct impact assessments. The Office of the Attorney General shall enforce the provisions of the bill. Introduced by Del. Michelle Maldonado [D] in Jan. 2024 and is in committee.
HB 877: Virginia Social Media Regulation Act established; penalties. Establishes the Virginia Social Media Regulation Act for the purpose of prohibiting minors in Virginia from possessing an account on any social media platform, defined in the bill, without the express consent of a parent or guardian. The bill requires a social media company to provide a minor’s parent or guardian with access to the minor’s account and all posts and information on such an account. The bill also places prohibitions on the type of data and personal information a social media platform may collect from a minor account holder and prohibits the use of any practice, design, or feature on a social media company’s platform that the company knows, or should reasonably know, could cause a minor account holder to have an addiction to the social media platform. Lastly, the bill provides that any violation of the Virginia Social Media Regulation Act shall constitute a prohibited practice and be subject to the enforcement provisions of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act. Introduced by Del. Mark Earley [R] in Jan. 2024 and is currently in committee.
HB 1391: Commission on Social Media established; report. Establishes the 20-member Commission on Social Media in the legislative branch to study and make recommendations on the impacts and harms to citizens caused by social media platforms hosting or amplifying content that includes threats or suggestions of physical violence or danger toward citizens, institutions, groups, associations, or physical structures of the Commonwealth. The Commission will study the impact on citizens of dangerous and violent rhetoric, threats, harassment, doxing, intimidation, misinformation, disinformation, defamation, and deceptive practices of social media companies. The Commission will also study the impact of certain practices by social media companies, such as algorithmic amplification and target advertising, on citizens. The bill requires the Commission to report annually to the General Assembly on its activities and provides that the Commission will sunset on July 1, 2026. Introduced by Del. Wendy Gooditis [D], Del. Nadarius Clark [D], and Del. Alfonso Lopez [D] in Nov. 2022 but did not progress.
HB 1413: Identity of persons communicating anonymously over the Internet; procedure governing certain subpoenas in civil proceedings; social media companies and platforms. Applies the procedures governing certain subpoenas in civil proceedings, currently applicable to Internet service providers, to social media companies and platforms. Introduced by Del. Mike Cherry [R] in Jan. 2024 and is in committee.
SB 359: Consumer Data Protection Act; social media platforms; addictive feed. Prohibits a person that operates a social media platform that has knowledge that a user of the social media platform is a child under the age of 18 from using an addictive feed, defined in the bill, unless such social media platform obtains verifiable parental consent. Consumer Data Protection Act; social media platforms; addictive feed. Prohibits a person that operates a social media platform that has knowledge that a user of the social media platform is a child under the age of 18 from using an addictive feed, defined in the bill, unless such social media platform obtains verifiable parental consent. Introduced by Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg [D], Sen. David Suetterlein [R] and Sen. Lashrecse Aird [D] in Jan. 2024, passed the Senate unanimously and was sent to the House.
Legal Actions:
Attorney General Miyares Co-Leads 21-State Coalition in Support of National TikTok Ban. On August 5, 2024, Attorney General Jason Miyares co-led a 21-state coalition urging the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to uphold the divest-or-ban legislation passed by Congress. Enacted earlier this year, the federal law bans TikTok in the United States unless ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese-owned parent company, sells its stake in the platform. In response, ByteDance and TikTok filed a lawsuit against the federal government. The attorneys general are asking the court to deny TikTok’s petition, asserting that Congress has the power to act in this matter of national security and foreign affairs. Their letter claims that “TikTok poses significant threats to both national security and consumers’ privacy by indiscriminately collecting user data that could be accessed by the Chinese Communist Party, a longstanding adversary of the United States. Additionally, TikTok’s operations infringe upon Americans’ right to privacy and promote harmful content to minors. Allowing TikTok to operate in the United States without severing its ties to the Chinese Communist Party exposes Americans to the risk of the CCP accessing and exploiting their data.”
The Virginia Attorney General, Jason Miyares, co-led this amicus brief with Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen. The following states joined Virginia and Montana’s coalition: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah.
Multi-State Letter Urging Google Not To Censor Crisis Pregnancy Centers From Search Results. On July 21, 2022, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares and Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron led a multistate letter to Google expressing concerns about recent political pressure encouraging Google to discriminate against crisis pregnancy centers in search results, online advertising, and other products like Google Maps. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has advocated for the shutting down of crisis pregnancy centers, and Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) and Congresswoman Slotkin (D-MI), joined by 19 of their Democrat colleagues, sent Google their own letter, urging them to discriminate against these private charities by removing them from search results. 15 other state Attorneys General signed onto AG Miyares and AG Cameron’s letter, promising to investigate potential violations of antitrust laws and religious discrimination, should Google yield to this political pressure and attack free speech.
Multistate Letter to Biden Administration Opposing Disinformation Board. On May 5, 2022, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares submitted a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas, joined by 19 other attorneys general, opposing the Biden Administration’s attack on the First Amendment, saying that the creation of a “Disinformation Governance Board”violates the constitutional freedoms that state attorneys general are responsible for defending. The attorneys general argue that this government watchdog agency would abridge a citizen’s right to express their opinions and disagree with the government, furthering self-censorship rather than protecting freedom of speech. The board’s creation is also an example of federal overreach, noting that there is no statutory authority to support its inception, particularly as the public’s elected representatives debate the issue of disinformation in Congress.
The letter states that “the Disinformation Governance Board, by its very existence, and almost certainly by design, threatens to “enforce silence” when Americans wish to express views disfavored by the Administration. It is therefore already chilling free speech and impeding the political process in Virginia and every other state. This is unconstitutional, illegal, and un-American. Unless you turn back now and disband this Orwellian Disinformation Governance Board immediately, the undersigned will have no choice but to consider judicial remedies to protect the rights of their citizens.”
AG Miyares Letter to University Presidents on Pro-Palestine Campus Protests. On November 11, 2023, Attorney General Miyares sent a letter addressed to College and University Presidents in Virginia, urging school leaders that “our universities should do more to address anti-Semitism.” The letter followed about a month after the start of the October 7 Israel-Palestine conflict. It accuses university leaders of “standing silent” in response to chants heard at pro-Palestine rallies and demonstrations on college campuses. Miyares argued that the chant, “‘from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ is a call for the complete destruction of Israel,” adding that rhetoric “inciting or producing lawless action” does not fall within free speech protections under the First Amendment. The letter also noted that universities may apply different standards to expression from groups not affiliated with the institution, based on their varying policies.
