UpdatedMar 18

Supreme Court Appears Reluctant to Limit Biden Admin Contact With Social Media

The court is considering whether the government’s pressuring of sites to remove posts about COVID-19, the 2020 election violated the First Amendment.

By Epoch Times Staff

| Published Mar 18, 2024 | Updated Mar 18, 2024

Save

Supreme Court Appears Reluctant to Limit Biden Admin Contact With Social Media — People leave the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Feb. 21, 2024. Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Pinned

What Happened at Today's Hearing

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Supreme Court Appears Wary of Limiting Biden Admin’s Social Media Contacts in Free Speech Case

By Matthew Vadum

Mar 18

Supreme Court Appears Wary of Limiting Biden Admin’s Social Media Contacts in Free Speech Case — Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts (L) along with (L–R) Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson (back) stand in the House of Representatives ahead of President Joe Biden's third State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol on March 7, 2024. Shawn Thew/Pool/AFP via Getty Images

Supreme Court justices seemed skeptical of state arguments on March 18 that the federal government was wrong to communicate with social media platforms about public health issues during the recent pandemic.

At the same time, during oral argument in Murthy v. Missouri, the states argued that the federal government strong-armed social media companies into censoring disfavored views on important public issues such as side effects related to the COVID-19 vaccine and the pandemic lockdowns. Applying this kind of pressure violates the First Amendment, the states argued.

Dr. Vivek Murthy is the U.S. surgeon general. The state of Missouri and other parties sued the federal government for alleged censorship by pressuring social media companies to suppress certain content.

Supreme Court Justices Indicate Curbing Censorship Could Cause Issues for Government

By Zachary Stieber

Mar 18

Supreme Court Justices Indicate Curbing Censorship Could Cause Issues for Government — Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court pose for their official photo at the Supreme Court in Washington on Oct. 7, 2022. (Front L–R) Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Elena Kagan. (Back L–R) Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images

Several U.S. Supreme Court justices on March 18 suggested a ruling in favor of individuals who are challenging how government officials pressured social media companies to censor users would lead to a number of repercussions.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, appointed by former President Donald Trump, offered the scenario of Louisiana state officials being doxxed, with their private information being posted online. Some people then called for harming the officials, but the posts fell short of being illegal in and of themselves.

The FBI saw the posts and alerted social media outlets. The FBI says the posts are “significantly threatening,” Justice Barrett said in her hypothetical. Should the court block the FBI from doing that?

“I’m a purist on the First Amendment, so my answer would be ‘yeah,’” Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguinaga responded.

Justice Barrett pushed back, asking if the official was aware of how often the FBI engages in that type of communication.

“That’s why I have my backup answer, Your Honor, which is, if you think there needs to be more, the FBI absolutely can identify certain troubling situations like that for the platforms and let the platforms take action,” Mr. Aguinaga said.

Respondents ‘Cautiously Optimistic’

By Jan Jekielek and Savannah Hulsey Pointer

Mar 18

What Happened at Today's Hearing

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Protesters in support of free speech picket outside the Supreme Court during arguments on March 18, 2024, on whether the Biden administration violated the First Amendment in pressuring social media companies to remove COVID-19 and 2020 election-related content. (Joseph Lord/The Epoch Times) — Protesters in support of free speech picket outside the Supreme Court during arguments on March 18, 2024, on whether the Biden administration violated the First Amendment in pressuring social media companies to remove COVID-19 and 2020 election-related content. Joseph Lord/The Epoch Times

Government’s Rebuttal

By Savannah Hulsey Pointer

Mar 18

Jackson Voices ‘Concern’

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Counter False Speech With True Speech: Louisiana AG

By Austin Alonzo

Mar 18

Does Facebook or the Government Have a Larger Role in Moderation?

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Questions on ‘Disinformation Dozen’

By Savannah Hulsey Pointer

Mar 18

What About Jumping Out Of Windows?

By Austin Alonzo

Mar 18

Barrett Questions if Respondents ‘Articulating Different Standards’

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Respondents: Government Wasn't Asking, It Was Telling

By Austin Alonzo

Mar 18

‘Diluting the Concept of Coercion’: Roberts

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

'Government Censorship Has No Place In Our Democracy': Louisiana AG

By Austin Alonzo

Mar 18

Fletcher Describes Government Interactions with Media

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Concentration of Social Media and Coercion

By Austin Alonzo

Mar 18

‘Persuasion’ Not a First Amendment Violation: Government Lawyer

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Alito Asks About Interaction Between Government and Social Media

By Savannah Hulsey Pointer

Mar 18

Exhortation Or Coercion?

By Austin Alonzo

Mar 18

Fletcher Argues No Causal Link for Government Censorship

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Fletcher Criticizes Fifth Circuit Injunction As Vague

By Austin Alonzo

Mar 18

Justice Thomas Questions Other Ways to View The Case

By Savannah Hulsey Pointer

Mar 18

Government begins argument

By Jacob Burg

Mar 18

Doctor Discusses Censorship, Retribution for Opposing COVID ‘Consensus’

By Joseph Lord

Mar 18

Protesters in support of free speech gather outside the Supreme Court ahead of oral arguments in a major free speech case challenging the Biden admin's pressuring of social media platforms to censor content on March 18, 2024. (Joseph Lord/The Epoch Times) — Protesters in support of free speech gather outside the Supreme Court ahead of oral arguments in a major free speech case challenging the Biden admin's pressuring of social media platforms to censor content on March 18, 2024. Joseph Lord/The Epoch Times

First Amendment Will Be ‘A Dead Letter’ If SCOTUS Sides With Biden: Expert

By Joseph Lord

Mar 18

What to Know About Today's Cases

Mar 18

Supreme Court to Hear Arguments in Biden Admin’s Censorship of Social Media Posts

By Tom Ozimek

Mar 16

Supreme Court to Hear Arguments in Biden Admin’s Censorship of Social Media Posts — President Joe Biden delivers the State of the Union address in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington on March 7, 2024. Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear oral arguments in a case that concerns what two lower courts found to be a “coordinated campaign” by top Biden administration officials to suppress disfavored views on key public issues such as COVID-19 vaccine side effects and pandemic lockdowns.

The Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing on March 18 in Murthy v. Missouri, which started when the attorneys general of two states, Missouri and Louisiana, filed suit alleging that social media companies such as Facebook were blocking access to their platforms or suppressing posts on controversial subjects.

The initial lawsuit, later modified by an appeals court, accused Biden administration officials of engaging in what amounts to government-led censorship-by-proxy by pressuring social media companies to take down posts or suspend accounts.