The Trump administration settles Murthy v. Missouri from 2022, preventing the Surgeon General, CDC, and CISA from having social media companies suppress speech
The Trump administration has agreed to a settlement that will bar three federal agencies from pressuring social media companies …
ReutersMike Scarcella
Context & Ripple Effects
The case moved from a 2023 injunction against administration contacts with platforms to a Supreme Court pause and, in 2024, a decision that left no court-imposed limits on Biden-era communications. This settlement creates a narrower, agency-specific constraint through executive action rather than a broad Supreme Court rule.
It matters because the covered agencies sit at the intersection of public-health, cybersecurity, and platform-policy debates. The earlier appeals-court finding of likely First Amendment violations had already made informal government influence over moderation a central issue.
First-order effects
The Surgeon General, CDC, and CISA are barred by the settlement from pressuring social-media companies to suppress speech, changing the terms on which those agencies can seek platform action.
Social-media companies gain a clearer basis to resist coercive or pressure-based requests from the three covered agencies, while retaining their own moderation decisions.
Second-order effects
Other federal offices communicating with platforms will face stronger scrutiny over whether outreach is informational, voluntary, or coercive, particularly where it concerns contested content.
Platforms may formalize and document government-contact channels more carefully, separating requests for information or security coordination from moderation demands.
Third-order effects
The settlement reinforces a shift from litigation over broad government-platform contact to rules focused on the conduct of particular agencies and officials; its reach beyond the named agencies remains uncertain.
If similar constraints are adopted elsewhere, public agencies may need to rely more on public communications and voluntary partnerships than on private pressure to influence online speech.
The trend: Government-platform coordination is being recast around clearer limits on official influence over private content-moderation decisions.
We just won Missouri v. Biden. As Missouri's Attorney General, I sued the Biden regime for brazenly colluding with Big Tech to silence Missouri families — censoring the truth about COVID, the Hunter Biden laptop, the open border, and the 2020 election. They tried to turn [image]
🚨BREAKING WIN: Government Agencies BANNED From Pressuring Big Tech to Censor Americans for 10 YEARS A Consent Decree in Missouri v. Biden now bars the CDC, CISA, and the U.S. Surgeon General from coercing social media platforms to suppress protected speech for the next DECADE. [i…
🚨Big Breaking News: The Federal speech police have disarmed in the landmark Missouri v. Biden case that exposed the Censorship-Industrial Complex. Pursuant to a consent decree settling the dispute, for the next 10 years the Surgeon General, CDC, and CISA: “shall take no [image]
BREAKING: NCLA reaches historic settlement in Missouri v. Biden, striking a major blow against government-induced social media censorship. CDC, CISA and the U.S. Surgeon General are now barred from threatening social media companies into censoring constitutionally protected [imag…
🚨 BREAKING: Huge win for free speech...Missouri v. Biden just settled. The U.S. government signed a 10-year consent decree admitting it colluded with Big Tech to silence Americans on COVID, the Hunter Biden laptop, and the 2020 election. The CDC, CISA, and Surgeon General are [im…
Huzzah! The consent decree in Missouri v. Biden is a historic victory for free speech in the US. Though I had to switch to the government side in the case after I became NIH director, I've never been more pleased by “losing” in my life. A huge win for all Americans.
BREAKING: I am delighted to report that we finally achieved victory today in Missouri v. Biden, our case challenging government censorship on social media. CDC, CISA and the U.S. Surgeon General are now barred from threatening social media companies into censoring
Senator Eric Schmitt got a participation trophy and is declaring victory 😂 — His injunction says that CISA, the CDC, and the Surgeon General can't censor the 3 plaintiffs on 5 platforms. — Government officials can still communicate with platforms, tell them content is wrong/f…
@kdbyproxy Ira ‘Bluebeard Homer’ Goldman on bluesky
In the normal course (of course, this isn't normal), is it odd that the caption on this suit, now resolved, still reads Missouri v Biden, rather than Missouri v Trump? [images]
Ah peak stupidity. A bunch of grifters who were moderated on social media sued the Biden admin claiming “censorship.” Bounced around stupid courts w/SCOTUS finally saying “um, no evidence of gov't censorship.” Some of the plaintiffs now work in the admin. Either way the lawsui…
The Biden Administration pressured Big Tech companies to censor what Americans could say online. We exposed the censorship-industrial complex. Yesterday's consent decree was a MAJOR WIN for free speech.
In 2023, Missouri sued Biden's admin for colluding with Big Tech to censor speech. I signed Missouri's amicus brief. We won! @CDCgov, @Surgeon_General, & @CISAgov can no longer deplatform First Amendment-protected speech. Congrats to @SenEricSchmitt for leading the fight! [image]
A win for the First Amendment. @JudiciaryGOP's investigation exposed how the Biden Administration pressured Big Tech to censor American speech online. Today, the U.S. government signed a 10-year consent decree finally admitting it colluded with these companies to silence [image]
What a mess. The district court wrote a piece of fan fiction in favor of the plaintiffs. It was a performance piece — issued on the Fourth of July, when courts are closed. It was riddled with errors — even fabricated quotes. Schmitt lost at the Supreme Court, which gave us, [imag…
Government jawboning is wrong — whether the pressure is coming from a Republican administration or a Democratic one. While this settlement may provide some limited protection and is a step in the right direction, much more needs to be done to limit jawboning. Congress must pass […