California state lawmakers have passed a bill that could impose hefty fines on social media platforms for amplifying “hateful content through their algorithms.

Senate Bill 771 arrived on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk on Sept. 22 and is waiting for him to either sign it into law or veto it.

Authored by state Sen. Henry Stern, a Democrat, the legislation outlines fines of up to $1 million for intentional violations and $500,000 for reckless violations of California law that prohibits intimidation or attacks targeting “race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, immigration status, or other protected characteristics.”

Under SB 771, a social media platform that boosts content that would “promote, facilitate, or contribute to conduct that violates state civil rights laws” would be liable for civil penalties beginning Jan. 1, 2027.

The bill faced mixed support in both chambers.

It cleared the Assembly on Sept. 10 with 51 supporting votes, two oppositions, and 27 abstentions.

In the state Senate, it passed on Sept. 11 after receiving 30 supporting votes, eight opposition, and two abstentions.

“This bill will ensure that the laws that currently apply to the aiding and abetting of hate crimes, when it comes to social media platforms ... they’ll be liable just like individual people will be,” Stern said at the Sept. 11 Senate floor hearing.

Stern said in a July 8 Assembly Judiciary Committee hearing that his bill aims to make existing laws applicable to corporations and social media platforms, and to exist as a deterrent to ensure tech companies do not use online platforms to generate clicks and profit from content that incites violence.

Supporters of SB 771 said the move helps protect certain minority groups.

“We have seen the deadly link between online radicalization and real-world violence, and that deadly link is social media,” Vlad Khaykin, representing the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said during the Assembly hearing. “Their algorithms amplify hate because hate drives clicks, and clicks drive profits.”

Citing research from his organization, Khaykin said most tech companies are not confronting extremism or hate on their platforms, alleging that the lack of action is intentional.

However, critics said the bill could lead to censorship and government overreach.

“This proposal would open the door for bad faith actors to weaponize vague or subjective claims of harm to target and silence opposing views,” Aodhan Downey, representing the Computer and Communications Industry Association, said at the same hearing. “It would compel over-removal, discourage open dialog, and chill free expression across platforms.”

SB 771 could also conflict with section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, according to Downey. This federal law protects online platforms from being liable for content posted by third parties and for “good faith” moderation decisions.

Social media content moderation has been a topic of national discussion in recent years.

On Sept. 23, Google announced through its lawyers that YouTube content creators who were removed for their comments on COVID-19 or the 2020 election can rejoin the platform.

Last month, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote in a letter to Congress that the federal government had pressured Facebook to censor certain content related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Newsom has until Oct. 12 to review and decide on SB 771 and all bills sent to his desk during this legislative session.