Skip to main content
U.S.

Gov’t likely violated 1st Amdt with COVID social media censorship, court says

Share

A federal appeals court has ruled the Biden administration — along with government agencies like the CDC and FBI — likely violated the First Amendment when they pushed to censor and moderate posts about COVID-19 on social media during the pandemic. While it’s not being disputed that social media posts about COVID were being censored, limited or slapped with disclaimers, the question centers on if the White House had legal authority to pressure social media companies to place limits on those posts.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals judges unanimously ruled on Friday, Sept. 8, those government agencies did not have the right to do so. The ruling narrowed the scope of an order from a Louisiana judge in July that had blocked many federal agencies from contacting social media companies about moderation.

The three-judge panel ruled the White House, the surgeon general, the CDC and FBI all likely “coerced the platforms to make their moderation decisions by way of intimidating messages and threats of adverse consequences,” or “significantly encouraged the platforms’ decisions by commandeering their decision-making processes, both in violation of the First Amendment.”

Government officials claim they had the responsibility to limit what they called “disinformation” from spreading online during a health emergency, but the plaintiffs who first filed suit argued the efforts violated Americans’ rights to free speech. The lawsuit was filed by the Republican attorneys general in Missouri and Louisiana, a conservative website owner, and four private individuals who were against the Biden administration’s COVID-19 policy.

The ruling states President Biden and government agencies cannot coerce social media platforms to remove content. The court’s decision allows the government to contact social media platforms to urge the removal of content, but they cannot pressure companies to comply.

According to the ruling, the agencies had pressured companies in the past by way of “intimidating messages” and “threats of adverse consequences.” The Biden administration has 10 days to seek a Supreme Court review.

In response to the ruling a White House spokesperson told The Washington Post:

“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.

“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.”

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

A FEDERAL APPEALS COURT HAS RULED THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION ALONG WITH GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LIKE THE CDC LIKELY VIOLATED AMERICANS’ FIRST 

AMENDMENT RIGHTS WHEN THEY PUSHED TO CENSOR AND MODERATE POSTS ABOUT COVID-19 ON SOCIAL MEDIA DURING THE PANDEMIC.

IT’S NOT A MATTER OF **IF THIS WAS HAPPENING –

SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS ABOUT COVID BEING CENSORED, LIMITED, OR SLAPPED WITH DISCLAIMERS ISN’T DISPUTED.

IT’S WHETHER THE WHITE HOUSE AND CDC HAD **LEGAL AUTHORITY TO PRESSURE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES TO PLACE LIMITS ON POSTS ABOUT VACCINES AND COVID ORIGINS.

THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS JUDGES UNANIMOUSLY RULED THEY DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SO.

THE THREE-JUDGE PANEL RULED THE WHITE HOUSE, THE SURGEON GENERAL, THE CDC, AND FBI – 

ALL LIKELY “COERCED OR SIGNIFICANTLY ENCOURAGED SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS TO MODERATE CONTENT” IN VIOLATION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS CLAIM THEY HAD THE RESPONSIBILITY TO LIMIT WHAT THEY CALLED “DISINFORMATION” FROM SPREADING ONLINE DURING A HEALTH EMERGENCY.

BUT THE REPUBLICAN ATTORNEYS GENERAL WHO FIRST FILED SUIT –

ARGUED THE EFFORTS VIOLATED AMERICANS RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH.

THE RULING STATES PRESIDENT BIDEN AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES CANNOT COERCE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS TO REMOVE CONTENT.

THE RULING ALLOWS THE GOVERNMENT TO CONTACT SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS TO URGE THE REMOVAL OF CONTENT – BUT THEY CANNOT PRESSURE COMPANIES TO COMPLY.

IN THE PAST – THEY HAD – ACCORDING TO THE RULING –

BY WAY OF “INTIMIDATING MESSAGES” AND “THREATS OF ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES”.

THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HAS 10 DAYS TO SEEK A SUPREME COURT REVIEW.

IN RESPONSE TO THE RULING A WHITE HOUSE SPOKESPERSON TOLD THE WASHINGTON POST QUOTE –

“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.”

“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.”