WASHINGTON, July 5 — A US federal court on Tuesday restricted some top officials and agencies of President Joe Biden’s administration from meeting and communicating with social media companies to moderate their content.
The injunction was in response to a lawsuit brought by the Republican attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri, who alleged that government officials went too far in their efforts to get platforms to combat vaccine and election misinformation.
The ruling by a federal court in Louisiana marks a win for conservative advocates in the United States who allege that the Biden administration has used the coronavirus pandemic and the threat of misinformation as an excuse to censor or suppress online content.
But it could seriously limit top government agencies from notifying the platforms about false, misleading or problematic content.
The order applies to a slew of top law enforcement agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the State Department, Justice Department as well as health agencies including the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention.
The ruling also applies to prominent officials such as White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre.
The decision restricts agencies and officials from meeting with social media companies or flagging posts for “the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech” under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
A White House official said the Justice Department was reviewing the court’s injunction and will evaluate its options.
“This administration has promoted responsible actions to protect public health, safety, and security when confronted by challenges like a deadly pandemic and foreign attacks on our elections,” the official said.
“Our consistent view remains that social media platforms have a critical responsibility to take account of the effects their platforms are having on the American people, but make independent choices about the information they present.”
There was no immediate response from social media platforms including the Meta-owned Facebook and Twitter.
Some experts in misinformation and First Amendment law criticised the ruling, saying authorities needed to strike a balance between calling out falsehoods and veering towards censorship or curbing free speech.
“The court’s order in this case is certainly too broad,” said Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.
“It would insulate the platforms not just from coercion but from criticism as well.” — AFP
