On Thursday, a legal battle is expected to take place as the Justice Department prepares its argument to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in an effort to get a ban on the government working with social media sites to restrict American voices lifted.
The divisive injunction, ordered on July 4 by federal Judge Terry A. Doughty, prohibits representatives of the White House and government agencies from speaking with tech firms about the management of material on social media platforms. The main thrust of the DOJ’s defense is the claim that these activities could inadvertently violate the First Amendment.
The allegations, which stem from a lawsuit filed by Republican state attorneys general from Missouri and Louisiana, contend that senior government officials colluded with significant social media companies under the pretense of battling disinformation. The complaint claims that this alleged conspiracy led to the suppression of discussion on issues such Hunter Biden’s laptop, the origins of COVID-19, and the effectiveness of face masks.
The Biden administration is presently disputing Doughty’s eye-catching injunction, which compares the government’s response to the pandemic to a “Orwellian “Ministry of Truth.” “If the Plaintiffs’ allegations are true, the present case arguably involves the most significant attack against free speech in United States history,” the injunction reads. It continues, “The Federal Government, and particularly the Defendants named here, are alleged to have flagrantly disregarded the First Amendment’s right to free speech in their attempts to suppress alleged disinformation.”
The Biden administration “likely violated the Free Speech Clause,” according to Doughty’s assessment, throwing doubt on the government’s position and resulting in a significant loss for the White House. No of the speaker’s ideology or stance, the court underscores that “viewpoint discrimination is an especially egregious form of content discrimination” and stresses the need of protecting free speech rights.
While admitting that the issues highlighted cross ideological lines, the injunction also highlights the fact that the suppression claimed in the lawsuit mainly targeted conservative perspectives.
The Department of Justice quickly challenged the order in response, claiming that doing so may cause “irreparable harm” in terms of safeguarding American citizens and democratic institutions.
The order is being hailed as a “significant win” for safeguarding fundamental liberties by Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, who also pledges to defend it in court. He criticizes the Department of Justice’s brazen assertion that continuing the repression of political speech will do “irreparable harm” to the country.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance expresses confidence in the Fifth Circuit’s agreement with the District Court’s finding of significant First Amendment breaches. The plaintiffs in the action claim that government help enabled Big Tech to suppress them. Senior legal counsel for the organization, Zhonette Brown, criticizes the pressure put on social media sites by several governmental bodies to limit individuals’ voice.
The Justice Department declines to directly respond and instead refers to its filed papers, while the White House chooses to remain silent.
On Thursday at 2:00 pm, both sides are scheduled to make their cases before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.