Supreme Court Dismisses Case on Censorship Allegations Against Social Media Platforms
In a recent turn of events, the Supreme Court, through a 6-3 vote, has dismissed lower-court rulings favoring states like Louisiana and Missouri. These rulings supported their allegations that officials from the Democratic administration had put undue pressure on social media platforms to suppress conservative viewpoints.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the court, stated that the states and other parties lacked the legal right or standing to sue. Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Clarence Thomas were, however, in dissent.
Implications for Social Media Users
This decision is not expected to impact typical social media users or their posts. The case was one of many this term that related to social media companies and their role in the context of free speech.
In February, the court considered Republican-passed laws in Florida and Texas that would bar large social media companies from removing posts based on the expressed viewpoints. By March, the court had established standards for when public officials can block their social media followers.
Arguments by the States
States like Missouri and Louisiana had argued that entities like White House communications staff, the surgeon general, the FBI, and the U.S. cybersecurity agency were among those who exerted “unrelenting pressure” to force changes in online content on social media platforms.
Responses from the Biden Administration
The Biden administration, however, highlighted concerns over losing the ability to communicate with social media companies about antisemitic and anti-Muslim posts, as well as on issues of national security, public health, and election integrity.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre pointed out that the court’s decision was appropriate as it would enable the Biden Administration to continue its work with technology companies to ensure the safety and security of the American people.
In contrast, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill labeled the decision as “unfortunate and disappointing.”
Free Speech Advocates React
Free speech advocates have praised the outcome, but also expressed disappointment in the lack of guidance provided by the court.
Alex Abdo, litigation director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, emphasized the importance of understanding the line between permissible attempts to persuade and impermissible attempts to coerce.
Implications for Future Cases
This case could have implications for future cases regarding the government’s acceptable use of influence and coercive threats to free speech. Earlier, a panel of three judges on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, had ruled that the Biden administration had likely applied unconstitutional pressure on the media platforms.
This decision marks the sixth time this term that the court has dismissed rulings by the 5th Circuit, one of the nation’s most conservative appeals courts.
Noteworthy Cases
Other noteworthy cases include:
- Last week, the court upheld a gun restriction aimed at protecting domestic violence victims, overturning a 5th Circuit panel.
- Earlier in June, the court unanimously ruled that anti-abortion doctors lacked standing to challenge Food and Drug Administration decisions to ease access to the abortion drug mifepristone.
The case is officially known as Murthy v. Missouri, 23-411.
