Supreme Court allows federal government to continue suppressing social media content

In a case described as having “profound implications for almost every aspect of American life,” the highest court in the land will examine the restrictions placed on the White House’s interactions with tech companies.

The Supreme Court’s decision, made on October 20, also temporarily suspended the limitations imposed by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana Monroe Division, which had originally granted the injunction on July 4.

The injunction extended to various government entities, including the White House, the surgeon general, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and, following an October 3 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

These agencies were prohibited from communicating with social media companies regarding the topic of “misinformation.”

The lawsuit, originally brought in May 2022 by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, alleges that Biden officials violated the First Amendment by working with social media platforms to suppress content related to Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19), election integrity and the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.

Dissenting justices slam government censorship

The recent Supreme Court ruling means that the stay preventing the injunction from being enforced will remain in place until a final decision is reached, which could take until the end of the current term in June 2024.

While the Supreme Court will not address the full lawsuit but only the preliminary injunction as amended by the 5th Circuit, the decision will likely impact similar cases. The dissenting justices, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, issued a strong defense of free speech rights and opposition to government censorship of private speech.

“At this time in the history of our country, what the court has done, I fear, will be seen by some as giving the government a green light to use heavy-handed tactics to skew the presentation of views on the medium that increasingly dominates the dissemination of news. That is most unfortunate,” said Alito

Legal experts suggest that the Supreme Court’s decision will provide detailed guidance on how the First Amendment applies to situations where the government coerces or encourages social media companies to censor specific viewpoints. (Related: Facebook Files show more government collusion to destroy the First Amendment.)

The lawsuit contends that the Biden administration engaged in a coordinated campaign to stifle certain opinions on social media platforms.

The decision could have significant implications for national security concerns related to false information online, especially concerning ongoing international conflicts and future elections. The Supreme Court will likely examine whether the government overstepped its bounds by pressuring social media platforms to engage in censorship, while the government argues it was defending its policies.

Although the injunction preventing communication with social media platforms is paused, legal experts believe that the government may moderate its suppression efforts to reduce the “paper trail” of censorship.

Still, this case underscores the ongoing debate over the role of social media companies in shaping public discourse and the government’s influence on these platforms.

The Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision will also have implications for related cases, including those involving state laws that regulate social media platforms. Legal experts emphasize the significance of this case for free speech and its potential to set national precedents and guidance for future cases in the realm of social media free speech. The Supreme Court’s decision, expected in late spring 2024, will undoubtedly impact the lives of millions of people worldwide.

Watch this clip about the DOJ declaring war on the First Amendment.