Originally published September 11, 2023 2:00 pm PDT
In a significant judgment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, located in New Orleans, found that the Biden administration overstepped First Amendment boundaries in their approach to COVID-19 content on social media platforms.
The judgment, detailed over 75 pages, was passed by a panel consisting of two judges nominated during George W. Bush’s tenure and one from the Trump era, according to a Fox News report.
They unanimously opined that entities such as President Biden, the CDC, FBI, and the surgeon general should not exert undue influence or “coerce” social media entities into removing content they find objectionable.
The decision emerges from a lawsuit initiated in Louisiana.
The case alleges that the current administration sought to suppress conservative opinions by intimidating social platforms, like the newly renamed X (previously known as Twitter) and Facebook, with potential antitrust legal actions or adjustments to laws safeguarding platform liabilities.
This lawsuit saw the collaborative efforts of Missouri and Louisiana, a conservative web platform proprietor, and four individuals who have voiced their objections against the administration’s stance on COVID-19.
Reflecting on the court’s interpretation, the ruling conveyed that the administration “coerced the platforms to make their moderation decisions by way of intimidating messages and threats of adverse consequences” and had “significantly encouraged the platforms’ decisions by commandeering their decision-making processes, both in violation of the First Amendment.”
This perspective was shared by the Washington Post.
Louisiana’s Attorney General, Jeff Landry, viewed the judgment as a significant stride against undue censorship. He took to X, expressing: “Fifth Circuit just unanimously affirmed Judge Doughty’s injunction against White House, CDC, FBI and others — giving Americans and #FreedomOfSpeech a major win against censorship, totalitarianism, and Biden. #FirstAmendment.”
While the Fifth Circuit’s judgment was stern on the administration’s involvement with social media content, they believed U.S. District Court Judge Terry A. Doughty’s prior injunction to be “overbroad.”
They highlighted that this injunction could inadvertently prevent the administration from participating in lawful activities.
Doughty, a Trump nominee, had imposed an injunction with ten provisions, nine of which the Fifth Circuit deemed potentially restrictive.
Moreover, in this revision, entities such as the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, and the State Department were extricated from the order’s purview.
In response to the ruling, a spokesperson from the White House communicated to the Washington Post, “This Administration has promoted responsible actions to protect public health, safety, and security when confronted by challenges like a deadly pandemic and foreign attacks on our elections.”
They continued by emphasizing that “Our consistent view remains that social media platforms have a critical responsibility to take account of the effects their platforms are having on the American people, but make independent choices about the information they present.”
