Justice Department Says Social Media Injunction Must be Clarified

Judge Terry A. Doughty issued the 155-page opinion and seven-page injunction in response to a case brought by the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri. The case accused federal agencies of violating the First Amendment by pressuring social media platforms to remove or limit content related to coronavirus vaccines and voting fraud.

In his ruling, Doughty concluded that the states are likely to succeed at trial and directed federal officials to stop notifying social media companies and researchers of problematic content. However, he included exceptions for issues such as crime alerts, national security threats, and attempts to suppress voters.

Judge blocks U.S. officials from tech contacts in First Amendment case

The government has requested a stay on the preliminary injunction, either until the planned appeal by the U.S. Department of Justice is ruled on by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, or for one week to allow for a faster emergency appeal.

The motion argues that certain parts of the injunction conflict with each other, particularly regarding the prohibition on officials speaking publicly about false social media posts, while also protecting officials’ right to free speech.

The motion also claims that the government would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction remains in effect, while the plaintiffs are referencing outdated conduct that is unlikely to occur again.

According to the Justice Department, the scope of the injunction and the breadth of entities and employees it covers will have a chilling effect on lawful government conduct related to law enforcement, national security, and public discussion.

It was reported by The Washington Post that the U.S. State Department canceled a meeting with Meta, the parent company of Facebook, to discuss foreign influence campaigns. The cancellation was confirmed by the State Department on Thursday.