Washington Examiner

Fifth Circuit to reconsider Big Tech free speech case as Supreme Court considers involvement.

The 5th Circuit Grants Rehearing in Missouri v. Biden Case

The Missouri v. Biden case, which previously ⁤imposed restrictions on the Biden administration’s communication with Big Tech companies ⁤regarding content moderation and free speech,⁣ has been granted a rehearing by⁣ the 5th Circuit. This ​decision comes after the Louisiana and Missouri state attorneys general requested⁢ the inclusion of various entities in the ruling, such as the‍ Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the Election ⁤Integrity Project, and the State⁤ Department’s Global Engagement‌ Center.

Biden Administration Accused ⁣of ‘Sue and Settle’ Tactic

The rehearing was approved just days ⁣before the Supreme Court is set to⁣ determine whether to uphold the ⁤lower ​court’s ruling. The attorneys general argue that ​the Cybersecurity ⁢and Infrastructure Security Agency, in particular, has violated the First Amendment through its involvement in⁢ the Election Integrity Project, which‌ they claim ⁤serves as a central hub for federal censorship efforts.

In⁣ July, U.S. District⁣ Judge Terry Doughty of Louisiana​ issued an order ⁢that restricted the⁢ federal government’s⁤ communication ⁢with social media‍ platforms⁤ regarding content. The subsequent ruling by a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ​supported this decision but narrowed down‌ the entities affected. The Biden administration appealed the ruling and requested a hold on the decision until a petition for review could⁢ be filed with the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was initially expected to rule on Friday ⁣but extended the deadline until Wednesday. The rehearing is anticipated ⁤to take place after the Supreme Court’s decision.

Last year, Republican ⁣attorneys general from Missouri and Louisiana, along with four individual plaintiffs, filed the lawsuit. They ⁢claimed ‌that their social media posts about the COVID-19 lab leak ​theory and vaccine side effects‍ were either ⁤removed or suppressed, alleging that federal agencies coerced social media ​platforms into censoring them in violation of the First ‌Amendment.

The Election⁢ Integrity Project, a collaboration between the Stanford Internet Observatory ​and other entities, was established to combat misinformation​ related to COVID-19 and‌ the ⁢2020 election. House Judiciary ‌Chairman Jim Jordan has sought to obtain records of ⁢communications between the Election Integrity Project and‌ federal agencies regarding misinformation.

Click here to read ​more from ​The Washington ​Examiner.

How‌ does the use ‌of the​ “sue-and-settle” strategy by the Biden administration affect ⁤public ‌input and legal procedures?

-and-Settle’ Strategy

The ‌decision to ‌grant a rehearing in the Missouri⁣ v. ⁢Biden case has sparked renewed debate over the ⁣Biden administration’s ⁣alleged use of the “sue-and-settle”⁤ strategy. Critics ⁢argue that the administration frequently uses litigation as a ⁣means to settle ongoing disputes​ without going through the normal‌ regulatory process. This approach has been criticized for‍ circumventing public input and sidestepping proper legal⁢ procedures.

In the Missouri v. Biden case, the original‌ ruling⁡ placed⁤ constraints on the Biden ⁢administration’s ability to communicate ⁤with⁣ Big⁢ Tech companies⁢ like Facebook, Twitter, and Google ​regarding⁢ content moderation and free speech issues. ​The plaintiffs argued‍ that the administration’s collaboration with these companies ⁤effectively⁣ gave them the power to control speech and silence dissenting voices.‌ The ruling aimed to ⁢ensure​ that the government’s involvement in content moderation was transparent⁢ and ⁣in line with First Amendment principles.

Additional Parties⁢ Requested ⁢to Join the Rehearing

Both ⁤the Louisiana and Missouri state ‌attorneys ⁣general‌ sought the inclusion of additional parties in the rehearing, expressing concerns over the⁣ potential implications of ​the original⁢ ruling. They requested the ⁢involvement of the Cybersecurity ‍and Infrastructure Security​ Agency (CISA), the Election Integrity Project, ⁢and⁤ the ‍State Department’s Global Engagement Center. These entities play crucial roles ‍in‌ ensuring cybersecurity,⁢ election integrity, and‌ countering disinformation.

The⁢ attorneys general‌ argued that the‍ inclusion ​of these parties would provide ‍a more comprehensive perspective on ⁣the impact of the⁤ original ruling. They highlighted ⁢the importance of addressing potential‌ national security risks, electoral integrity concerns, and the spread of disinformation in the⁢ digital⁤ age. By ⁢incorporating these entities into the rehearing, the court can gain a well-rounded understanding of the complexities surrounding⁢ the case.

Implications for Free Speech and‌ Content​ Moderation

The rehearing ‍in the Missouri v. Biden case ‌has​ significant implications⁣ for‌ free speech rights and content moderation⁣ practices on online platforms. The original ruling sought to strike a balance between protecting free speech and ensuring that the government’s involvement in content moderation does not infringe upon individuals’ First Amendment rights.⁣ However, the rehearing provides an opportunity ‌to further examine‌ and refine this delicate‍ balance.

The​ involvement of additional⁢ parties such as CISA and the Election Integrity Project highlights the⁣ growing​ recognition​ of‌ the ‌role ‍cybersecurity and electoral integrity play in shaping discussions around​ free ​speech ⁣and content moderation. ​The court’s decision could potentially shape the future of content moderation policies, particularly regarding government involvement and the regulation of ⁢Big Tech companies.

Conclusion

The⁣ Grant of ⁢Rehearing in the ‌Missouri ‍v.‌ Biden case by the ​5th Circuit⁣ shines a spotlight on the Biden administration’s ‍alleged sue-and-settle strategy, inviting​ a broader examination of the government’s role in⁤ content moderation. ​By incorporating the perspectives of entities like CISA ‌and the Election Integrity Project, the court​ can gain a more comprehensive ⁤understanding of the ‌implications​ of its original ‌ruling. The decision ultimately holds‌ the potential to shape ⁣the future ⁤landscape of free speech, content moderation, and the government’s involvement in⁢ these critical issues.



" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker