Back

The decision was likely to be seen as victory for #conservatives who’ve long argued that #SocialMedia platforms’ #content #moderation efforts restrict their #FreeSpeech rights. But some advocates also said the ruling was an improvement over a temporary #injunction US Dist Judge Terry #Doughty issued July 4.

David Greene, an atty w/the ElectronicFrontier Foundation, said the new injunction was “a thousand times better” than what Doughty, an appointee of #Trump, had ordered originally.

Doughty’s decision had affected a wide range of govt departments & agencies, & imposed 10 specific #prohibitions on govt ofcls. The appeals court threw out 9 of those & modified the 10th to limit it to efforts to “#coerce or significantly encourage social-media companies to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce, including through altering their #algorithms, posted social-media #content containing #protected free #speech.”

The #5thCircuit panel also limited the govt institutions affected by its #ruling to the WH, the #SurgeonGeneral’s office, the #CDC & the #FBI. It removed restrictions #Doughty had imposed on the depts of #State, #DHS & #HHS & on agencies including the U.S. #Census Bureau, #NIAID, & #CISA. The #5thCircuit found that those agencies had NOT coerced the #SocialMedia companies to #moderate their sites.

The judges wrote that the WH likely “#coerced the platforms to make their #moderation decisions by way of intimidating messages & threats of adverse #consequences.” They also found the #WhiteHouse “significantly encouraged the platforms’ decisions by commandeering their decision-making processes, both in violation of the #FirstAmendment.”

A WH spox said in a statement that the #DOJ was “reviewing” the decision and evaluating its options.

“This Administration has promoted #responsible actions to protect #PublicHealth, #safety, & #security when confronted by challenges like a deadly #pandemic & foreign #attacks on our #elections,” the WH ofcl said. “Our consistent view remains that #SocialMedia 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.”

The decision is likely to have a wide-ranging impact on how the #FederalGovernment communicates w/the #public & the #SocialMedia companies about key #PublicHealth issues & the #2024elections.

The case is the most successful salvo to date in a growing #conservative #legal & #political effort to limit coordination between the federal govt & #tech platforms.

The appeals court judges found that pressure from the #WhiteHouse & the #CDC affected how #SocialMedia platforms handled posts about #covid-19 in 2021, as the #Biden admin sought to encourage the public to obtain #vaccinations.

The judges detail multiple emails & statements from WH ofcls that they say show escalating threats & pressure on the social media companies to address covid #misinformation.…

The judges also zeroed in on the #FBI’s communications w/#tech platforms in the run-up to the #2020elections, which included regular meetings w/the tech companies. The judges wrote that the FBI’s activities were “not limited to purely foreign threats,” citing instances where the #law enforcement agency “targeted” posts that originated inside the #UnitedStates, including some that stated incorrect poll hours or mail-in voting procedures.

The judges said in their rulings that the platforms changed their policies based on the #FBI briefings, citing updates to their terms of service about handling of #hacked materials, following warnings of #StateSponsored “hack & dump” ops.

The judges, however, found some of the govt communications enjoined by the district court to be permissible, including those of fmr chief medical adviser to the president, Anthony #Fauci. They said the record did NOT show that Fauci communicated directly w/ the platforms & said his efforts to promote the govt’s #scientific & &policy views did NOT “run afoul of the #FirstAmendment.”

They also found that the lower court erred in barring #CISA’s interactions w/the companies, finding that its efforts to flag #content to the platforms did NOT amount to “attempts to coerce” the companies’ #moderation decisions.

#ChrisKrebs, the CISA chief fired by #Trump over his endorsement of the #2020election result, said he found the ruling “reassuring.”

“This ruling eviscerated the district court decision,” #Krebs said.

The judges also said there was NO evidence that the #StateDepartment’s communications w/the platforms “went beyond educating the platforms on ‘tools & techniques’ used by foreign actors.”

The #DOJ did not immediately respond to requests for comment, & it was not immediately clear if it would #appeal the ruling. The order will take effect in 10 days, unless the government seeks intervention from #SCOTUS.

The #DOJ had argued that #Doughty’s ruling was overly broad & could “chill” a wide range of lawful communications between the govt & #SocialMedia companies, especially in the face of #public #emergencies.…

Any #appeal of the order would bring the debate over #online #speech before #SCOTUS, which is already expected to take up conflicting appeals court rulings over state social media #laws this year.

The #5thCircuit ruling reversed #Doughty’s order specifically enjoining the actions of leaders at #DHS, #HHS & other agencies, saying many of those individuals “were permissibly exercising government speech.”

“That distinction is important because the state-action doctrine is vitally important to our Nation’s operation — by distinguishing between the state & the People, it promotes ‘a robust sphere of individual liberty,’” the 5th Circuit judges wrote.

…Stanford Law School prof Daphne Keller said the #5thCircuit’s ruling appeared to allow “a lot of normal communications as long as they are not threatening or taking over control of platforms’ #content decisions.”

“But it also says they can’t 'significantly encourage’ platforms to remove lawful content, so the real question is what that means,” she said.