Conway Order Analysis
The Critical Statement
"The Court is not prepared to hold that AI output constitutes protected speech under the First Amendment at this stage of the litigation."1
Why This Matters
This is the most direct judicial statement on the AI speech question to date.3 While the case settled before this could become binding precedent, the Conway Order signals how courts may approach this issue in future litigation.
Key implications:
- Courts are skeptical that AI output automatically receives First Amendment protection
- The burden may be on defendants to establish speech protections apply
- Product liability and negligence claims remain viable against AI companies
Case Background
Garcia v. Character.AI
Filed: 2024 | Settled: January 7, 20262
The Garcia family alleged that a Character.AI chatbot engaged in harmful conversations with their minor child, contributing to psychological harm. The case presented the first major opportunity for a court to rule on whether AI conversational output is protected speech.
Defendant's Argument: Character.AI argued that chatbot output is creative expression protected by the First Amendment, similar to books, movies, or video games.
Plaintiff's Argument: The AI company had a duty of care to prevent foreseeable harm, regardless of speech classification.
Order Analysis
What the Court Decided
The Conway Order declined to grant defendant's motion to dismiss based on First Amendment grounds. While not a final ruling on the merits, this decision allowed the case to proceed past the speech classification defense.
What the Court Did NOT Decide
- Did not definitively rule that AI output is NOT speech
- Did not establish a test for when AI output receives protection
- Did not address Section 230 applicability in detail
The settlement prevented these questions from being resolved.
Precedential Value
| Aspect | Status | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Binding Precedent | NO | Settlement prevents binding ruling |
| Persuasive Authority | LIMITED | Order on motion to dismiss, not final judgment |
| Signal Value | HIGH | Indicates judicial skepticism of AI speech claims |
Future Implications
The Conway Order will likely be cited in future AI liability litigation, despite its limited precedential value. Defense counsel in AI cases should be prepared for courts to follow Judge Conway's skeptical approach.
Strategic Considerations:
- AI companies may need alternative defenses beyond First Amendment claims
- Products liability framing by plaintiffs may gain traction
- Section 230 defenses remain largely untested in AI context
Note on Settlement
The terms of the Garcia v. Character.AI settlement are confidential. The settlement was announced on January 7, 2026, ending what would have been the first major trial on AI speech classification.