Current:Home > NewsJudge limits Biden administration's contact with social media companies -AdvancementTrade
Judge limits Biden administration's contact with social media companies
View
Date:2025-04-15 03:46:51
A judge on Tuesday prohibited several federal agencies and officials of the Biden administration from working with social media companies about "protected speech," a decision called "a blow to censorship" by one of the Republican officials whose lawsuit prompted the ruling.
U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty of Louisiana granted the injunction in response to a 2022 lawsuit brought by attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri. Their lawsuit alleged that the federal government overstepped in its efforts to convince social media companies to address postings that could result in vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 pandemic or affect elections.
Doughty cited "substantial evidence" of a far-reaching censorship campaign. He wrote that the "evidence produced thus far depicts an almost dystopian scenario. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a period perhaps best characterized by widespread doubt and uncertainty, the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian 'Ministry of Truth.'"
Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt, who was the Missouri attorney general when the lawsuit was filed, said on Twitter that the ruling was "a huge win for the First Amendment and a blow to censorship."
Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry said the injunction prevents the administration "from censoring the core political speech of ordinary Americans" on social media.
"The evidence in our case is shocking and offensive with senior federal officials deciding that they could dictate what Americans can and cannot say on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other platforms about COVID-19, elections, criticism of the government, and more," Landry said in a statement.
The Justice Department is reviewing the injunction "and will evaluate its options in this case," said a White House official who was not authorized to discuss the case publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
"This administration has promoted responsible actions to protect public health, safety, and security when confronted by challenges like a deadly pandemic and foreign attacks on our elections," the official said. "Our consistent view remains that social media platforms have a critical responsibility to take account of the effects their platforms are having on the American people, but make independent choices about the information they present."
The ruling listed several government agencies, including the Department of Health and Human Services and the FBI, that are prohibited by the injunction from discussions with social media companies aimed at "encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech."
The order mentions by name several officials, including Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and others.
Doughty allowed several exceptions, such as informing social media companies of postings involving criminal activity and conspiracies; as well as notifying social media firms of national security threats and other threats posted on platforms.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit also included individuals, including conservative website owner Jim Hoft. The lawsuit accused the administration of using the possibility of favorable or unfavorable regulatory action to coerce social media platforms to squelch what it considered misinformation on masks and vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also touched on other topics, including claims about election integrity and news stories about material on a laptop owned by Hunter Biden, the president's son.
Administration lawyers said the government left it up to social media companies to decide what constituted misinformation and how to combat it. In one brief, they likened the lawsuit to an attempt to put a legal gag order on the federal government and "suppress the speech of federal government officials under the guise of protecting the speech rights of others."
"Plaintiffs' proposed injunction would significantly hinder the Federal Government's ability to combat foreign malign influence campaigns, prosecute crimes, protect the national security, and provide accurate information to the public on matters of grave public concern such as health care and election integrity," the administration says in a May 3 court filing.
- In:
- Biden Administration
- Technology
- Lawsuit
- Social Media
- Politics
- COVID-19 Pandemic
- Pandemic
- Elections
veryGood! (4)
Related
- Friday the 13th luck? 13 past Mega Millions jackpot wins in December. See top 10 lottery prizes
- New Mexico will not charge police officers who fatally shot man at wrong address
- Jury hears that Michigan school shooter blamed parents for not getting him help
- Mark Zuckerberg accused of having blood on his hands in fiery Senate hearing on internet child safety
- Pregnant Kylie Kelce Shares Hilarious Question Her Daughter Asked Jason Kelce Amid Rising Fame
- Man fleeing police caused crash that injured Gayle Manchin, authorities say
- Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg apologizes to parents of victims of online exploitation in heated Senate hearing
- A Dallas pastor is stepping into Jesse Jackson’s role as leader of his Rainbow PUSH Coalition
- Trump's 'stop
- Lawmaker resigns shortly before Arizona House was to vote on expelling her
Ranking
- Megan Fox's ex Brian Austin Green tells Machine Gun Kelly to 'grow up'
- Secret US spying program targeted top Venezuelan officials, flouting international law
- Eyewitness to killing of Run-DMC’s Jam Master Jay tells jury: ‘Then I see Jay just fall’
- The pop culture hill I'll die on
- Toyota to invest $922 million to build a new paint facility at its Kentucky complex
- The Best French Pharmacy Skincare Products That Are the Crème de la Crème
- Noem looking to further bolster Texas security efforts at US-Mexico border
- Deadly school bus crash in Ohio yields new safety features and training — but no seat belt mandate
Recommendation
Elon Musk's skyrocketing net worth: He's the first person with over $400 billion
Larry David addresses controversial FTX 2022 Super Bowl commercial: Like an idiot, I did it
2024 NBA Draft expands to two-day format: second round will be held day after first round
Former NBA All-Star Marc Gasol officially announces retirement from basketball
Current, future North Carolina governor’s challenge of power
Justin Timberlake Wants to Apologize to “Absolutely F--king Nobody” Amid Britney Spears Backlash
Did 'Wheel of Fortune' player get cheated out of $40,000? Contestant reveals what she said
Aircraft laser strike reports soar to record high in 2023, FAA says