* Sun-Times reporter Mitchell Armentrout…

A coalition of the world’s largest tech companies is suing to block Chicago’s new tax on social media giants like TikTok, Facebook and X, claiming the city’s first-of-its-kind, per-user levy tramples over the First Amendment rights of major corporations that contend they’re part of the free press.

The lawsuit filed Friday in Cook County Circuit Court by the tech trade group NetChoice takes aim at the social media tax proposed by Mayor Brandon Johnson and retained in the budget ultimately approved by a recalcitrant City Council last fall.

Companies started paying the tax last month at a rate of $0.50 per user after the first 100,000 Chicagoans who log onto Snapchat, Reddit, Instagram and other popular sites, with city officials projecting a $31 million annual windfall for future mental health programs.

Big Tech wants to nip the nation’s first-ever enacted social media tax in the bud as several states, including Illinois, consider similar measures to wring money from companies to offset the public health threat many experts say their platforms can pose, especially for young people.

* From the complaint…

[T]he Tax violates Article VII, Section 6 of the Illinois Constitution because it is imposed upon an occupation—the business of operating a social media website—but is not authorized by the General Assembly.

Third, a “discriminatory tax on the press burdens rights protected by the First Amendment.” Ark. Writers’ Project, Inc. v. Ragland, 481 U.S. 221, 227 (1987). Selective taxation of the media—like the Tax here—poses a “particular danger of abuse” and is presumptively unconstitutional. […]

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no Law . . . abridging the Freedom of Speech, or of the Press; or of the Right of the People peaceably to assemble.” U.S. Const. amend. I. The protections of the First Amendment have been incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution to restrict States and their subdivisions, including Chicago. These protections apply with full force to online expression, and governments cannot “regulate [‘social media’] free of the First Amendment’s restraints.”

Chicago’s Social Media Tax Implicates the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court’s “cases clearly establish that a discriminatory tax on the press burdens rights protected by the First Amendment.”

These U.S. Supreme Court precedents are not limited to the journalistic press, as “liberty of the press . . . comprehends every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion.”

* More from WTTW…

Gov. JB Pritzker proposed a similar tax as part of his budget for the 2027 fiscal year that he said would generate $200 million.

For the largest social media firms with 1 million Illinois users or more, the proposal calls for charging $165,000 per month and an additional 50 cents per month for each user over the 1 million user mark, according to Pritzker’s proposal.

NetChoice has filed dozens of lawsuits against states attempting to tax and regulate social media, including against a California law designed to shield children from social media and other online content that could harm them mentally or physically.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down an injunction on Thursday issued in that case.

* Related…

* Akerman Intelligence | Is Social Media Tax Worth a Follow?: While the City successfully defended a previous extension of its Amusement Tax to streaming services such as Netflix and Spotify, it did so on the basis that the same content is subject to sales taxes when delivered in a physical format. A court may not necessarily reach the same conclusion for the SMAT, as social media is solely a creature of the Internet for which no physical analog exists. […] The Chicago SMAT, much like Maryland’s Digital Advertising Tax when it was first enacted, will likely serve as a test case, and other state and local legislatures will be watching carefully to see how it fares under scrutiny. But until the Chicago SMAT survives both administration and litigation hurdles, Illinois would be wise to be conservative in its budgetary projections from its SMP Fee.