§ 143A.007.User Remedies

The private remedy, and its later subsections are unusual.

Subsection (a): a user may bring an action against a platform that violates the chapter with respect to the user.

Subsection (b) sets the remedies, and damages are not among them. A user who proves a violation is entitled to declaratory relief under the Declaratory Judgments Act, including costs and reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees, and injunctive relief.

The absence of damages is a deliberate design choice. The remedy is to get the expression restored, not to be paid for its removal — and the fee award is what makes bringing the action viable.

Subsection (c) supplies teeth for non-compliance: if a platform fails to promptly comply with a court order, the court shall hold it in contempt and shall use all lawful measures to secure immediate compliance, including daily penalties sufficient to secure it.

Both verbs are mandatory, which removes the discretion a court would ordinarily have over contempt.

Subsections (d) and (e) are addressed to the litigation over the chapter itself. A user may sue regardless of whether another court has enjoined the attorney general from enforcing the chapter or declared any provision unconstitutional, unless that decision binds the court in which the action is brought.

And nonmutual issue preclusion and nonmutual claim preclusion are not defenses — so a platform that won against one claimant cannot use that judgment against a different one.

Those provisions anticipate exactly what happened: the chapter was enjoined and litigated for years, and they are drafted so private enforcement survives an adverse ruling that does not bind the particular court.