Ted Cruz and Ron Wyden introduce the JAWBONE Act, which would let Americans sue federal officials who try to coerce broadcasters or platforms to censor speech
US Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) today introduced the JAWBONE Act, a proposed law that could fuel lawsuits …
Ars TechnicaJon Brodkin
Context & Ripple Effects
The proposal joins a longer run of US efforts to make perceived viewpoint-based moderation legally actionable. Earlier related coverage included Hawley bills tying platform liability protections to moderation practices and a Texas law challenged by Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter industry groups.
Unlike those measures, this bill is aimed at federal officials’ alleged pressure on platforms and broadcasters rather than at platforms’ own rules. Its bipartisan sponsorship places government-platform contacts, not only Section 230, at the center of the policy dispute.
First-order effects
If enacted, the bill would create a private litigation route for Americans alleging that federal officials coerced broadcasters or platforms to suppress speech.
Federal agencies and officials engaging with platforms on content questions would face greater legal exposure, while affected platforms and broadcasters could become key sources of evidence in those cases.
Second-order effects
Agencies would have reason to formalize, narrow, or document communications with platforms, potentially making informal content-escalation channels more legally sensitive.
The measure would shift some political and legal attention away from changing Section 230 toward proving whether government requests crossed into coercion; platforms could face more discovery demands even when they are not the defendants.
Third-order effects
If this approach gains traction, US speech policy could increasingly regulate the boundary between government influence and private moderation through private lawsuits rather than solely through platform-liability rules.
The durable fault line is likely to be evidentiary: courts would need to distinguish coercive state pressure from permissible government speech or requests, producing uneven outcomes unless a clearer standard emerges.
The trend: The JAWBONE Act is part of a broader shift from debating platforms’ moderation discretion to litigating the government’s role in shaping it.
Under the Biden administration, officials pressured platforms to restrict posts on elections and COVID-19. Under Trump, broadcasters faced regulatory threats tied to Jimmy Kimmel's suspension after a joke. In both cases, the concern is the same. Government officials used [image]
Government officials can't legally censor protected speech, but they can strong-arm private parties into doing it for them. That's called jawboning, and it violates your First Amendment rights. We're supporting the JAWBONE Act to stop that coercion. [image]
A little BOLO from AM: Cruz's JAWBONE Act is finally coming today, and it's bipartisan, with Wyden. Comes amid Cruz's frustrations over FCC's Carr pressuring broadcasters but also touches on COVID days on social media and AI [image]
Today, Sens. Cruz & Wyden introduced a great anti-jawboning bill. It: ▶️ creates a statutory ban on jawboning involving social media, AI, and broadcasters ▶️ lets victims sue the government, and ▶️ requires transparency so we can catch government jawboning when it happens
Government officials who can't censor you themselves shouldn't get to strong-arm platforms into doing it for them. That's government censorship by coercion. It's called jawboning, and it violates the First Amendment. [image]
Federal officials don't get to outsource censorship by bullying private platforms into doing their dirty work. Sens. Cruz and Wyden's JAWBONE Act would help stop that coercion and give victims a way to fight back. Passing it would be a win across party lines.
excited to hear this new anti-jawboning bill is coming from @SenTedCruz and bipartisan group of Senators. Very much needed, as @SpenceKjell noted in recent @RSI essay linked below.
Can't wait to read the full bill text of Sen. @tedcruz and @RonWyden's JAWBONE Act. As described, JAWBONE is similar to the GRANITE Act, only pointed at the *U.S.* government instead of foreign states. Brilliant idea! Congress should pass it. [image]
@NicoPerrino How does this work when the biggest jawboner is the president himself, and any jawboning he does is going to be considered an official act for which he is immune from civil liability under Nixon v. Fitzgerald?
FINALLY: A bipartisan effort to end unconstitutional jawboning! The bill will require transparency and create a cause of action for damages when the feds coerce private platforms into censoring their users. Everyone — regardless of their politics — should support this.