{"id":2031960,"date":"2023-09-14T15:07:01","date_gmt":"2023-09-14T19:07:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2031960"},"modified":"2023-09-14T15:09:13","modified_gmt":"2023-09-14T19:09:13","slug":"biden-doj-seeks-supreme-courts-intervention-on-social-media-ruling","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/biden-doj-seeks-supreme-courts-intervention-on-social-media-ruling\/","title":{"rendered":"Biden DOJ seeks Supreme Court&#8217;s intervention on social media ruling."},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">20<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fbiden-doj-seeks-supreme-courts-intervention-on-social-media-ruling%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2031960&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><h2>The Department of Justice \u200bRequests Supreme Court Stay on Injunction Limiting Government&#8217;s Communications with Social Media Platforms<\/h2>\n<p>The Department of\u200b Justice (DOJ) has made a bold move by requesting the U.S. Supreme Court to stay \u2063an appeals court injunction that restricted the federal government&#8217;s ability to communicate with social media firms. This comes after a\u200d lower court found that\u2063 federal \u200dofficials had potentially violated the First Amendment&#8217;s free speech protections by <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/republican-senators-warn-biden-admin-running-covert-censorship-operation\/\" title=\"Republican Senators Warn Biden Admin Running Covert Censorship Operation\">pressuring social media platforms<\/a> to censor certain posts, including those related to\u200b the COVID-19 pandemic.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\u201cThis application concerns an unprecedented injunction\u200c installing the United States \u2064District \u200cCourt for the Western District of Louisiana as the superintendent of the Executive Branch\u2019s\u2062 communications with and about social-media platforms \u2014 including senior White House officials\u2019 speech addressing some\u2064 of the most salient public issues of the day,\u201d U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote in a filing.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<h3>Related Stories<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"http:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/us\/alabama-petitions-supreme-court-to-halt-lower-court-ruling-on-gop-drawn-voting-map-5489929\">Alabama Petitions Supreme Court\u2064 to Halt Lower Court Ruling on GOP-Drawn Voting Map<\/a> \u2062 &#8211; 9\/11\/2023<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"http:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/us\/infowars-host-wants-to-appeal-to-us-supreme-court-over-jan-6-case-5490844\">Infowars Host Wants to Appeal to US Supreme Court Over\u200c Jan.\u200d 6 Case<\/a> \u200d &#8211; 9\/13\/2023<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Last week, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals partially upheld a lower court ruling that accused U.S. officials \u200dof pressuring social media platforms to suppress posts about the COVID-19 pandemic\u200c and the 2020 election. The injunction, which applied to the White House, the surgeon general&#8217;s office, the CDC, and \u200bthe FBI, prohibited them from coercing or significantly\u200b encouraging companies to remove content. \u2063However, other agencies like the NIAID, CISA, and State Department \u200cwere not subject \u200dto this ruling.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\u201cUnder the modified injunction, the enjoined Defendants cannot coerce \u200cor significantly encourage a platform\u2019s content-moderation decisions. Such conduct\u200c includes threats of adverse \u200cconsequences\u2014even if those threats are not verbalized and never materialize\u2014so long as a reasonable person would construe a government\u2019s message as alluding to some form of punishment,\u201d a 5th Circuit panel of judges wrote.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The DOJ argues that the appeals court&#8217;s \u2064decision places unprecedented limits on the government&#8217;s ability to address matters\u2064 of concern, national security, and public\u2063 information dissemination. The Biden administration maintains that it requested social media companies to remove \u2064harmful misinformation\u2064 but \u2064denies forcing them to do so.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\u201cIf allowed to take effect, the injunction\u200c would \u2063impose grave and irreparable harms on the \u200cgovernment and the\u2064 public,\u201d Ms. Prelogar wrote for the DOJ.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The DOJ further contends that the lower court&#8217;s\u2063 ruling restricts the President&#8217;s aides from using their platform to address public concerns, hampers the FBI&#8217;s ability to address national security\u2064 threats, \u200dand limits the CDC&#8217;s \u2063ability to provide health information upon platforms&#8217; requests.<\/p>\n<p>For instance, the\u200b DOJ lawyers highlight\u2063 that the FBI regularly\u200b shares information with platforms regarding accounts potentially used by foreign actors \u200cor terrorist organizations. \u200dThe 5th Circuit acknowledged that the lower court ruling\u2064 found \u200bofficials likely coerced \u2062or <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/biden-officials-likely-violated-first-amendment-on-social-media-5th-circuit-court\/\" title=\"5th Circuit Court: Biden Officials May Have Breached First Amendment on Social Media.\">encouraged social media platforms<\/a> to\u200d moderate content, potentially violating\u200b the First Amendment. However, it also deemed \u200cthe injunction to be vague and broader than necessary.<\/p>\n<p>Earlier this week, the DOJ filed a motion with\u200d the 5th\u2063 Circuit Court to seek clarity on its ruling, which has been put on\u2063 hold until September 18 to allow the Biden administration to submit papers to the\u2063 Supreme Court. This request suggests that the agency is likely to appeal to the Supreme Court, setting \u2062the stage for a significant legal\u2062 battle over online speech and social media.<\/p>\n<p>Republicans and critics \u2063of\u200d the government&#8217;s\u200d COVID-19 response have \u200dbeen vocal about their concerns regarding the Biden administration&#8217;s handling of online content, accusing it of silencing dissenting viewpoints. The lawsuit filed by the attorneys general also alleges that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/biden-doj-seeks-supreme-courts-intervention-on-social-media-ruling\/\" title=\"Biden DOJ seeks Supreme Court's intervention on social media ruling.\">social media outlets blocked content\u200c related<\/a> to the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election.<\/p>\n<p><em>Reuters contributed to this report.<\/em><\/p>\n<p> <\/p>\n<h2>What \u2063is the title of the lawyer who represents the federal government before\u2064 the Supreme Court?<\/h2>\n<p><span>The \u2063solicitor general is \u2064the \u2063lawyer who represents the federal government \u200cbefore the Supreme Court:\u2064 He or she decides which cases (in which the United States is a party) should be appealed from\u2062 the lower courts and personally approves \u200deach one presented (Figure 13.11). \u2064L security, and public health on social \u2062media platforms. They claim that the injunction infringes on the government&#8217;s\u2063 constitutional\u2064 free speech rights and impairs its ability to effectively communicate with the \u2064public. Solicitor General Elizabeth \u200cPrelogar emphasized the significance of \u2062senior White House officials&#8217;\u200c speech \u200cin addressing important public\u2063 issues.<\/p>\n<p>The DOJ&#8217;s request for a stay on the injunction marks a significant \u200ddevelopment in the ongoing legal\u2063 battle between the federal government and social\u200b media platforms over content censorship. The lower court&#8217;s\u2063 ruling found that federal officials had exerted pressure on social media companies \u200dto censor certain posts \u2064related to the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 election. The 5th Circuit \u200cCourt of \u200dAppeals partially upheld this ruling, concluding\u200d that the government&#8217;s actions violated the First Amendment.<\/p>\n<p>Under\u200d the modified injunction, \u2063federal agencies like the White House, the surgeon general&#8217;s\u200c office, the CDC, and\u200b the FBI were prohibited\u2064 from coercing or significantly encouraging social\u2062 media platforms to remove content. However, other agencies like the NIAID, CISA, and State Department were \u200dnot subject\u2062 to these restrictions.<\/p>\n<p>The DOJ&#8217;s argument centers around\u200d the unprecedented limits imposed by the appeals court&#8217;s decision. They\u2063 claim that the government should have the ability to address matters of concern, national security, and public health on social \u2064media platforms without\u2063 infringing on \u200dconstitutional\u2064 rights. Essentially, they argue\u2063 that the injunction hampers the government&#8217;s ability to fulfill its crucial role in communicating with the public effectively.<\/p>\n<p>The request for a stay on\u200b the injunction\u200b speaks to \u200bthe broader debate surrounding the regulation of social media platforms. As these platforms have become increasingly influential in shaping public opinion and disseminating \u200dinformation, questions \u2062have arisen about the extent to which they should be subject to government oversight and regulation. Balancing \u2063the right\u200d to free \u2062speech with concerns \u2063about the spread of misinformation and \u2062harmful content\u200b has proven to \u2063be a complex challenge.<\/p>\n<p>The outcome of the DOJ&#8217;s request to the Supreme Court will have far-reaching implications for the relationship between the government and social media platforms. It\u200d will help outline the boundaries within which the \u200dgovernment can \u200coperate in regulating online content and interacting with social media companies.<\/p>\n<p>Overall, the DOJ&#8217;s move to request a stay on the injunction demonstrates their\u200b commitment to ensuring the government&#8217;s ability to effectively communicate\u2064 with the public on social media platforms. As the legal battle continues, the Supreme Court\u2062 will ultimately decide the limits of government communication with these platforms and the balance between free speech rights \u200cand content regulation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The DOJ has asked the Supreme Court to halt an appeals court injunction that restricted the government&#8217;s communication with social media companies. They want to overturn a lower court&#8217;s ruling that suggested federal officials may have violated free speech rights.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":58,"featured_media":2031970,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[543],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2031960","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-epoch-times"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2031960","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/58"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2031960"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2031960\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2031970"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2031960"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2031960"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2031960"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}