A civil rights group has reached a landmark settlement with the federal government, permanently barring dozens of federal agencies from pressuring social media companies to remove or suppress lawful speech online.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance announced Tuesday it had secured a consent decree in Missouri v. Biden, the long-running case alleging the Biden administration coordinated with Big Tech to silence Americans whose views conflicted with government messaging on COVID-19 and other politically sensitive topics.
Under the decree, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and the Office of the Surgeon General are all prohibited from threatening or coercing platforms including Facebook, Instagram, X, LinkedIn, and YouTube over content moderation decisions. Federal officials are also barred from directing or vetoing those decisions.
“This case began with a suspicion that blossomed into fact,” said John Vecchione, senior litigation counsel for NCLA. “Freedom of speech has been powerfully preserved by our clients.”
The settlement is awaiting final approval from U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, who previously issued one of the most sweeping injunctions in the case before it wound its way to the Supreme Court.
Plaintiffs, including Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and activist Jill Hines, argued federal officials unconstitutionally outsourced censorship to private companies to suppress conservative viewpoints. NCLA attorneys said discovery revealed a coordinated effort spanning multiple agencies and senior officials inside the Biden White House.
In 2024, the Supreme Court vacated a lower court injunction on standing grounds. The lawsuit continued in district court and ultimately produced Tuesday’s agreement.
The settlement includes a significant policy concession: the administration acknowledges that labeling speech as “misinformation,” “disinformation,” or “malinformation” does not strip it of First Amendment protections.
NCLA President Mark Chenoweth called the outcome a constitutional milestone. “Federal officials may police the line between lawful and unlawful speech,” Chenoweth said, “but they have no role in deciding if speech is true or false.”
Plaintiffs were granted authority to enforce the consent decree if violations occur, giving the agreement lasting legal weight beyond the initial ruling.
