Writy.
  • Home
  • Mass Tort
  • Personal Injury
  • Civil Rights
  • Worker’s Compensation
  • Premises Liability
  • Police Misconduct
No Result
View All Result
Writy.
  • Home
  • Mass Tort
  • Personal Injury
  • Civil Rights
  • Worker’s Compensation
  • Premises Liability
  • Police Misconduct
No Result
View All Result
Writy.
No Result
View All Result
shutterstock_social media disinformation on phone

Justice Alito temporarily blocks curbs on Biden administration’s communications with social media

Injury Insiders by Injury Insiders
September 15, 2023
in Premises Liability
0

[ad_1]

  1. Home
  2. Daily News
  3. Justice Alito temporarily blocks curbs on…

U.S. Supreme Court

Justice Alito temporarily blocks curbs on Biden administration’s communications with social media

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 15, 2023, 9:45 am CDT

shutterstock_social media disinformation on phone

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at New Orleans ruled Sept. 8 that the U.S. government likely violated the First Amendment by pressuring social media companies to block COVID-19 misinformation, posts on election fraud and other content. Image from Shutterstock.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito on Thursday temporarily blocked an injunction that curbed the Biden administration’s communications with social media.

Alito’s administrative stay gives the full Supreme Court time to consider the U.S. government’s request to block the injunction. His stay remains in effect through Sept. 22.

Courthouse News Service, Reuters and SCOTUSblog are among the publications with coverage.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at New Orleans ruled Sept. 8 that the U.S. government likely violated the First Amendment by pressuring social media companies to block COVID-19 misinformation, posts on election fraud and other content.

The 5th Circuit said social media companies can block posts on their own, but their decisions may violate the First Amendment when they act as a result of coercion or significant encouragement by the government. The injunction applied to the White House, the surgeon general, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI.

The lawsuit was filed by the states of Missouri and Louisiana and individual social media users whose posts were curbed.

In its application for a stay, the U.S. solicitor general’s office argues that the decision “contradicts fundamental First Amendment principles” because the government is entitled to use its “bully pulpit” to persuade U.S. companies to act in ways thought to advance the public interest.

The application also argues that the plaintiffs do not have standing because there is no showing that moderation of their posts was traceable to the government. The government also argues that the injunction is “vastly overbroad.”

The case formerly captioned Missouri v. Biden is titled Murthy v. Missouri in the stay application.



[ad_2]

You might also like

Announcement of orders and opinions for Monday, May 16

Announcement of opinions for Wednesday, April 17

April 17, 2024
501940

Bet Gordon Ramsey Feels Like An Idiot Sandwich For Letting This Happen To His Pub

April 16, 2024
Injury Insiders

Injury Insiders

Next Post
Adults frantically pull kids from water as 14-foot alligator approaches Girl Scouts in Texas lake – Law Officer

Adults frantically pull kids from water as 14-foot alligator approaches Girl Scouts in Texas lake – Law Officer

© 2022 injuryinsiders.com - All rights reserved by Injury Insiders.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Mass Tort
  • Personal Injury
  • Civil Rights
  • Worker’s Compensation
  • Premises Liability
  • Police Misconduct

© 2022 injuryinsiders.com - All rights reserved by Injury Insiders.