The Biden administration’s ability to communicate with social media companies regarding controversial content on COVID-19 and other issues has been significantly eased by a federal appeals court.
In its ruling on Friday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans stated that the White House, Surgeon General, Centers for Disease Control, and FBI cannot force social media platforms to remove posts they disagree with.
However, the court overturned certain aspects of a July 4 order from a federal judge in Louisiana that effectively prevented multiple government agencies from contacting platforms like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) to request content removal.
The revised order from the appeals court will not take immediate effect, as the Biden administration has 10 days to seek Supreme Court review.
This ruling comes in response to a lawsuit filed in northeast Louisiana, accusing administration officials of pressuring platforms to remove content by threatening antitrust actions or changes to liability laws.
The lawsuit highlighted topics such as COVID-19 vaccines, the FBI’s handling of President Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s laptop, and allegations of election fraud. It alleged that the administration was using regulatory threats to suppress conservative viewpoints.
The states of Missouri and Louisiana, along with a conservative website owner and four individuals opposed to the administration’s COVID-19 policy, filed the lawsuit.
Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry hailed Friday’s ruling as a “major win against censorship” in a post on X.
In a 75-page opinion, three judges from the 5th Circuit agreed with the plaintiffs, stating that the administration had violated the First Amendment by occasionally pressuring social media platforms with antitrust actions and changes to liability laws.
However, the court removed much of U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty’s broad July 4 ruling, stating that simply encouraging content removal does not always cross constitutional boundaries.
“It is important to note that an injunction is too broad if it restricts a defendant from engaging in legal activities. Nine of the preliminary injunction’s ten prohibitions risk doing just that. Furthermore, many of the provisions are redundant and therefore unnecessary,” stated the ruling.
The ruling also excluded certain agencies from the order, including the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, and the State Department.
The judges presiding over the case were Jennifer Walker Elrod and Edith Brown Clement, nominated by former President George W. Bush, and Don Willett, nominated by former President Donald Trump. Judge Doughty was nominated by Trump.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
