The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday threw out a challenge brought by two Republican state officials and conservative social media users ch...
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday threw out a challenge brought by two Republican state officials and conservative social media users challenging the White House’s pressure campaigns on social media companies to remove what the Biden administration deems “misinformation.”
In a 6-3 decision with Justice Amy Coney-Barrett writing the majority opinion, the court ruled that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the case, CNN reported. The high court did not rule on any of the First Amendment questions raised by the plaintiffs, which included the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana along with five conservative social media users.
In her majority opinion, Barrett wrote, “To establish standing, the plaintiffs must demonstrate a substantial risk that, in the near future, they will suffer an injury that is traceable to a government defendant and redressable by the injunction they seek. Because no plaintiff has carried that burden, none has standing to seek a preliminary injunction.”
Barrett acknowledged that there is evidence showing the White House “played a role” in moderating content on social media, but she argued that was not enough to justify an injunction. The plaintiffs cited Facebook restricting a Louisiana state representative’s posts about the COVID vaccine, arguing that the post was targeted because of the Biden administration’s pressure on the Big Tech company. Barrett, however, wrote in her opinion that there was “no evidence to support the states’ allegation.”
Conservative Justice Samuel Alito penned the dissent, writing that the case was “one of the most important free speech cases to reach this Court in years.” Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch joined Alito’s dissent.
Alito added that the Biden administration’s actions were “unconstitutional,” “coercive,” and “dangerous.”
“It was blatantly unconstitutional, and the country may come to regret the Court’s failure to say so,” he wrote, adding, “For months, high-ranking Government officials placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to suppress Americans’ free speech. Because the Court unjustifiably refuses to address this serious threat to the First Amendment, I respectfully dissent.”
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey reacted to the court’s decision, writing that the ruling “does not dispute” that “the deep state pressured and coerced social media companies to take down truthful speech simply because it was conservative.”
“My rallying cry to disappointed Americans is this: Missouri is not done,” Bailey added. “We are going back to the district court to obtain more discovery in order to root out Joe Biden’s vast censorship enterprise once and for all.”
The Daily Wire is suing the Biden administration in a separate social media censorship case, alleging that the U.S. State Department is engaging with and promoting censorship technology designed to bankrupt domestic media outlets with disfavored political opinions. Last month, a federal judge rejected the State Department’s attempt to get the censorship lawsuit dismissed. The Daily Wire is joined by The Federalist and the state of Texas as plaintiffs in the case.
No comments