The US Supreme Court rejected a lawsuit demanding that the executive authority be prevented from interfering with social media networks and removing content that it deems problematic, especially in health matters.
“Without any concrete link between their harm and the defendants’ conduct, Plaintiffs are asking us to conduct a review of years-long communications between dozens of federal officials, across various agencies, and numerous social media platforms,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett said for the majority. on various topics.”
She added: "The court's principle prevents us from (exercising such) general legal oversight over other branches of government."
By a majority of six votes, including the three progressives and three of the six conservatives including Chief Justice John Roberts, the justices held that the plaintiffs did not have an “interest to act,” which is a requirement for the court to accept a case for legal action, and thus deemed the appeal decision, which was stayed, in the judgment overturned. .
The case came as a result of a lawsuit filed by Republican attorneys general in the states of Louisiana and Missouri, who said that government officials went too far in trying to make social media platforms combat misinformation related to vaccines and elections, violating the First Amendment of the Constitution, which is linked to the freedom of expression of social media users.
Last year , a lower court prevented senior officials and agencies in the administration of Democratic President Joe Biden from meeting and communicating with social media companies to modify their content .
The decision issued on Wednesday represents a setback for conservative activists who say that the government pressured or colluded with platforms such as Facebook and X to censor right-wing content under the guise of combating misinformation.
Very factual content. Nice.
ReplyDelete