Current:Home > reviewsAppeals court reduces restrictions on Biden administration contact with social media platforms -Quantum Capital Pro
Appeals court reduces restrictions on Biden administration contact with social media platforms
View
Date:2025-04-16 10:43:53
A federal appeals court Friday significantly eased a lower court's order curbing the Biden administration's communications with social media companies over controversial content about COVID-19 and other issues.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans said Friday that the White House, the Surgeon General, the Centers for Disease Control and the FBI cannot "coerce" social media platforms to take down posts the government doesn't like.
But the court tossed out broader language in an order that a Louisiana-based federal judge had issued July 4 that effectively blocked multiple government agencies from contacting platforms like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) to urge the removal of content.
But the appeals court's softened order won't take effect immediately. The Biden administration has 10 days to seek a review by the Supreme Court.
Friday evening's ruling came in a lawsuit filed in northeast Louisiana that accused administration officials of coercing platforms to take down content under the threat of possible antitrust actions or changes to federal law shielding them from lawsuits over their users' posts.
COVID-19 vaccines, the FBI's handling of a laptop that belonged to President Joe Biden's son, Hunter, and election fraud allegations were among the topics spotlighted in the lawsuit, which accused the administration of using threats of regulatory action to squelch conservative points of view.
The states of Missouri and Louisiana filed the lawsuit, along with a conservative website owner and four people opposed to the administration's COVID-19 policy.
In a posting on X, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry called Friday's ruling "a major win against censorship."
In an unsigned 75-page opinion, three 5th Circuit judges agreed with the plaintiffs that the administration "ran afoul of the First Amendment" by at times threatening social media platforms with antitrust action or changes to law protecting them from liability.
But the court excised much of U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty's broad July 4 ruling, saying mere encouragement to take down content doesn't always cross a constitutional line.
"As an initial matter, it is axiomatic that an injunction is overbroad if it enjoins a defendant from engaging in legal conduct. Nine of the preliminary injunction's ten prohibitions risk doing just that. Moreover, many of the provisions are duplicative of each other and thus unnecessary," Friday's ruling said.
The ruling also removed some agencies from the order: the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency and the State Department.
The case was heard by judges Jennifer Walker Elrod and Edith Brown Clement, nominated to the court by former President George W. Bush; and Don Willett, nominated by former President Donald Trump. Doughty was nominated to the federal bench by Trump.
- In:
- Technology
- New Orleans
- Joe Biden
- Politics
- Louisiana
veryGood! (574)
Related
- A White House order claims to end 'censorship.' What does that mean?
- Pilot swims to shore with dog after plane crashes into Pacific Ocean near Los Angeles
- Suspects arrested in Arkansas block party shooting that left 1 dead, 9 hurt
- Tesla wants shareholders to vote again on Musk's $56 billion payout
- Dick Vitale announces he is cancer free: 'Santa Claus came early'
- Israelis grapple with how to celebrate Passover, a holiday about freedom, while many remain captive
- California sets long-awaited drinking water limit for ‘Erin Brockovich’ contaminant
- 'Sasquatch Sunset': Jesse Eisenberg is Bigfoot in possibly the strangest movie ever made
- Taylor Swift Eras Archive site launches on singer's 35th birthday. What is it?
- O.J. Simpson was chilling on the couch drinking beer, watching TV 2 weeks before he died, lawyer says
Ranking
- 'Survivor' 47 finale, part one recap: 2 players were sent home. Who's left in the game?
- Escaping Sudan's yearlong civil war was just the first hurdle to this American family's dream come true
- Why Even Stevens' Christy Carlson Romano Refuses to Watch Quiet on Set
- Cloning makes three: Two more endangered ferrets are gene copies of critter frozen in 1980s
- The Louvre will be renovated and the 'Mona Lisa' will have her own room
- Anti-Trump Republican Larry Hogan navigates dangerous political terrain in pivotal Senate contest
- Sydney Sweeney Slams Producer for Saying She Can't Act and Is Not Pretty
- NPR editor Uri Berliner resigns after essay accusing outlet of liberal bias
Recommendation
The Super Bowl could end in a 'three
The Daily Money: Is Starbucks too noisy?
Stock market today: Asian shares gain despite Wall Street’s tech-led retreat
The Best Graduation Gifts -- That They'll Actually Use
IRS recovers $4.7 billion in back taxes and braces for cuts with Trump and GOP in power
NBA play-in tournament: 76ers snag No. 7 seed, Bulls KO Hawks behind Coby White's career night
Wednesday's NHL games: Austin Matthews looks to score his 70th goal against Lightning
Shapiro aims to eliminate waiting list for services for intellectually disabled adults