It sure seems like MAGA judges have a “free speech for me, not for thee” philosophy. The Trumpy-Supreme Court just last week awarded LGBTQ bigot Lorie Smith the ability to discriminate against creating websites for gay weddings, largely based on a fraudulent request for one.
Now, the same folks who think books are so dangerous, they can’t seem to ban enough of them, think trying to keep social media safe, truthful and democratic violates the rights of liars, bigots, dangerous extremists, etc. For an extra FU to sanity, facts and decency, the judge issued his ruling on July 4th.
As Trump-appointed judges vie to see who can produce the most nakedly partisan rulings completely divorced from precedent and case law, a new contender has thrown his hat in the ring.
U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty on Tuesday barred Biden administration officials — everyone from Hea[l]th and Human Services to the Centers for Disease Control to the FBI — from flagging posts that spread misinformation to social media companies. Doughty ruled that such contact is a violation of the First Amendment. The companies include Facebook/Meta, Twitter, YouTube/Google, Instagram and many more.
The judgment bans the named officials from meeting with the companies, flagging worrying content, emailing or calling the companies about content, following up with the companies or even collaborating with groups like the Election Integrity Partnership to identify troublesome posts.
The Washington Post reports, “Over the past five years, coordination and communication between government officials and the companies increased as the federal government responded to rising election interference and voter suppression efforts after revelations that Russian actors had sowed disinformation on U.S. social sites during the 2016 election. Public health officials also frequently communicated with the companies during the coronavirus pandemic, as falsehoods about the virus and vaccines spread on social networks including Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.
That’s what MAGA Judge Doughty wants to stop. “The injunction is strikingly broad and clearly intended to chill any kind of contact between government actors and social media platforms,” Evelyn Douek, an assistant professor at Stanford Law School, told The Post. Though it makes an exception for voter suppression, criminal activity and some other matters, the injunction lacks clear guidance on "where the lines are," Douek says.
Think Elon Musk won’t interpret this ruling as a greenlight from the right-wing judiciary that extremist lies on Twitter are A-OK? Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Laurence Tribe and University of Michigan Law Professor Leah Litman wrote, “The injunction would insulate social media companies from criticism about their content moderation policies, not just from coercion.”
Tribe also called the injunction “blatantly unconstitutional.”
The injunction comes before the judge has formally ruled on the case but it’s a blaring signal that he’ll likely rule on behalf of the plaintiffs, The Post says.
TPM suggests this ruling will stay in place long into the 2024 presidential campaign:
The case now goes through the familiar gauntlet of right-wing-friendly venues: the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, and, likely, the Supreme Court. Should Doughty’s ruling survive, it’d be a sea change in the interpretation of this area of law. His injunction, at least, will likely remain in place for months, given the conservative dominance of the 5th Circuit and the time it’ll take for the case to reach the Supreme Court.
