The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board on Thursday denounced a Supreme Court decision that suggested it would give the government unfettered power to censor social media.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday, by a 6-3 majority, handed President Biden a major victory by tossing out a lawsuit, Marcy v. Missouri, which accused the current administration of conspiring with social media platforms to suppress opinion about the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Don’t be surprised if government officials interpret this ruling as a license to engage in further stealth censorship.” the committee wrote.
Lower courts have previously ruled in favor of states and individuals who have sued, alleging that federal authorities violated First Amendment rights by pressuring tech companies to censor posts.
FBI met weekly with major tech companies ahead of 2020 election, agent says
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board said liberals and conservatives alike may “regret” the ruling in the future. (Al Drago/Chris Hondros/Getty Images)
But a majority of the justices said the plaintiffs had failed to prove legal standing for their lawsuit.
“Particular defendants pressured particular platforms to censor particular topics, and then those platforms suppressed particular plaintiffs’ speech on those topics,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in the majority opinion.
She further argued that social media platforms were “moderating” other content before the government engaged with tech companies, and that they continued to use their “own discretion” even after being approached.
Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
“It is unfortunate that the majority rejected the legitimacy of free speech in this case, given the experience of COVID-19 and the Administration’s desire to crack down on ‘disinformation,’ and Justice Alito’s warning about stealth censorship seems correct. Liberals may regret this in the future as much as conservatives regret it here,” the committee said of the ruling.
However, others had more positive opinions about the outcome of the case.
Supreme Court to hear landmark First Amendment case challenging Biden administration’s collaboration with big tech companies
A photo taken at the Supreme Court in Washington on February 28, 2024. (AP Photo/Jacqueline Martin, File)
“This ruling rightly affirms the federal government’s right to notify platforms about credible digital threats from domestic and foreign actors and holds tech companies accountable for taking those threats seriously,” said Sacha Howarth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project. He told CNN.
White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre praised the ruling in a statement.
“The Supreme Court’s decision is right and helps ensure that the Biden Administration can continue the important work of working with tech companies to keep the American people safe after years of extreme and baseless Republican attacks on public servants doing the critical work of keeping the American people safe,” Jean-Pierre said.
For more articles on Media and Culture click here
The Justice Department previously argued that the temporary ban would cause “irreparable harm” because it could prevent the federal government from “working with social media companies on efforts to prevent significant harm to the American people and our democratic process.”
But Justice Alito said, “If the lower courts’ assessment of the voluminous record is correct, this is one of the most significant free speech cases to come before this Court in recent years.”
“For months, government officials have relentlessly pressured Facebook to stifle Americans’ free speech. And because the Supreme Court has wrongfully refused to address this serious threat to the First Amendment, I respectfully dissent,” he said.
Click here to get the FOX News app
Fox News’ Brianna Herlihy contributed to this report.
