Current:Home > NewsJudge limits Biden administration's contact with social media companies -CapitalCourse
Judge limits Biden administration's contact with social media companies
View
Date:2025-04-17 09:46:46
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! (72553)
Related
- Newly elected West Virginia lawmaker arrested and accused of making terroristic threats
- Israeli jets strike Gaza refugee camp, as US fails to win immediate support for pause in fighting
- Big Ten commissioner has nothing but bad options as pressure to punish Michigan mounts
- Ukrainian war veterans with amputated limbs find freedom in the practice of jiu-jitsu
- Taylor Swift Eras Archive site launches on singer's 35th birthday. What is it?
- Comedian Taylor Tomlinson to host new CBS late-night show After Midnight. Here's what to know about her.
- What is daylight saving time saving, really? Hint: it may not actually be time or money
- FDA proposes banning ingredient found in some citrus-flavored sodas
- Taylor Swift makes surprise visit to Kansas City children’s hospital
- Phoenix finishes clearing downtown homeless encampment after finding shelter for more than 500
Ranking
- What were Tom Selleck's juicy final 'Blue Bloods' words in Reagan family
- Moroccan archaeologists unearth new ruins at Chellah, a tourism-friendly ancient port near Rabat
- Parents of Northwestern State player Ronnie Caldwell file wrongful death lawsuit against coach
- Leroy Stover, Birmingham’s first Black police officer, dies at 90
- Are Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp down? Meta says most issues resolved after outages
- Judge in Trump fraud trial issues new gag order on attorneys after dispute over clerk
- New vehicles from Detroit’s automakers are planned in contracts that ended UAW strikes
- Did the Beatles song 'Now and Then' lead you to gently weep? You weren't alone
Recommendation
Gen. Mark Milley's security detail and security clearance revoked, Pentagon says
Indiana police investigate shooting that left 3 people dead
Iowa vs. Northwestern at Wrigley Field produced fewer points than 6 Cubs games there this year
RHONJ's Teresa Giudice Reveals She's Spending Christmas 2023 With Ex Joe Giudice
A White House order claims to end 'censorship.' What does that mean?
Celebrities running in the 2023 NYC Marathon on Sunday
Singapore’s prime minister plans to step down and hand over to his deputy before the 2025 election
The economy added 150,000 jobs in October as hiring slowed, report shows