⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit hears the lawsuit brought by X against the Center for Countering Digital Hate and the European Climate Foundation. CCDH published reports about hate speech and misinformation on X, formerly Twitter. X says CCDH scraped public posts and used the foundation's login credentials to access a separate Brandwatch database. X alleges contract violations and unlawful computer access, claiming the reports drove advertisers away. The defendants dispute liability and say the suit punishes protected research and speech. A federal district court dismissed the case. It struck the state-law claims under California's anti-SLAPP law, an early-dismissal procedure for claims arising from protected speech or petitioning. It dismissed the federal computer claim for inadequate allegations of qualifying loss and found no personal jurisdiction over the Dutch foundation. Personal jurisdiction means the court's authority to require a defendant to answer the lawsuit. For the foundation, the dispute concerns its own suit-related United States contacts. X now seeks to revive the suit or amend its complaint. Pete Patterson represents X. He is with Cooper and Kirk. He will argue that the claims target improper data access, not protected speech.

X Corp. v. Center for Countering Digital Hate, Inc., et al. (No. 24-2643) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued September 30, 2026.