A US appeals court temporarily blocks a lower July 6 court order sharply limiting US government officials' and agencies' contacts with social media companies
ReutersBrendan Pierson
Context & Ripple Effects
Two days after a federal judge issued an [[a:841773|injunction barring key Biden administration officials from contacting social media companies]] — a case brought by Missouri and Louisiana attorneys general over vaccine-related posts — an appeals court has temporarily blocked that July 6 order while the dispute moves up the appellate chain.
Biden administration officials and agencies can resume routine contacts with social media companies about content on their platforms for as long as the temporary block holds, instead of operating under the injunction's restrictions.
The Missouri and Louisiana attorneys general who won the injunction now have to carry their case through the appeals court rather than enforce it immediately against agencies.
Second-order effects
Social media companies get a reprieve from having to restructure how they handle government requests mid-litigation, but they remain caught between state litigants pressing the censorship claim and federal agencies seeking cooperation.
The appeals court's handling of this stay sets the template for how the related CISA ruling gets enforced or narrowed, since both cases turn on the same question of when government persuasion becomes coercion.
Third-order effects
The escalation path runs to the Supreme Court, which later agreed to hear the Justice Department's appeal and paused the ban itself (SCOTUS taking up the dispute) — putting the constitutional boundary of government involvement in platform moderation before the nation's highest court.
If the pattern holds, government-platform content coordination will be governed by judicially drawn lines rather than agency practice, forcing both administrations and platforms to build compliance structures around whatever boundary the courts settle on.
The trend: US courts are progressively redrawing the legal boundary between government communication with social media platforms and coerced censorship, with the Supreme Court poised to set the final line.
The ruling creates several exceptions in which gov't may contact platforms to flag threats to nat'l security & foreign election interference. Legally, these are dangerous opening for platforms/courts to determine what constitutes speech gov't can ask about & which it cannot.
@wendyp4545 It's a temporary injunction which is not unusual. The initial decision was a solid one that should hold up to judicial review. https://www.reuters.com/...
BREAKING: FIFTH CIRCUIT STAYS MISSOURI'S ULTRA-DUMB LAWSUIT BANNING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FROM DEFENDING AGAINST FOREIGN CYBER ATTACKS https://www.reuters.com/...
Makes sense. Doughty's opinion was so wrong-headed about the First Amendment and government and the platforms. Good on the 5th circuit. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
The lower court ruling posed a dangerous chilling threat to expression which the platforms could use as pretext to retreat from necessary election integrity & trust/safety efforts. I explain what's at stake for the 1st Amendment & platform accountability: https://techpolicy.press…
Judge Doughty's misguided ruling would likely only fan the flames of Big Tech minimalism under the guise of protecting free speech. For now, the 5th Circuit stay mitigates the chilling effect of Doughty's ruling. More from me as we wait for oral arguments.
Practically, by the time platform content has reached the level of a public safety, national security or election interference threat, it's likely already gone viral and it is dangerously late in the game to mitigate visibility and real-world harm.
Doughty's ruling is overly broad, overlooking First Amendment precedent. The mere act of contacting social media companies regarding violative content, incl. lies abt COVID & elections, shouldn't in itself be considered an 'attack against free speech."https://www.justsecurity.org…
The 5th Circuit just granted the Biden admin temporary relief from Judge Doughty's ruling two wks ago, which had banned gov't agencies/officials from contacting social media companies. Appellate order is minimal but this gives time for oral arguments:https://talkingpointsmemo.com…