The Biden Administration Appeals Social Media Order, Citing ‘Serious Harm’ Risk

Thursday saw the Biden administration lawyers submit a plea to a federal appeals court, requesting to halt a Louisiana federal judge’s ruling. They argued that the ruling, which significantly curtails executive branch communications with social media platforms, could lead to “serious harm.” This is due to its potential to disrupt the government’s ability to engage in an array of legal and responsible activities.

This request is the administration’s initial significant reaction to the July 4 decree by U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty in Monroe.

Former President Donald Trump’s conservative nominee, Doughty, issued an injunction on Tuesday. This injunction prevents various government agencies and administration officials from interacting with social media companies with the intent to “encourage, pressurize, or induce the deletion, suppression, or reduction of content featuring protected free speech” in any form.

OTHER NEWS
Federal funds allocated for breakwater, trails, and other projects in Washington State
Greece commits to increased defense spending, eyes F-35 fleet
Expected bill sign-off by Maine governor to ease abortion restrictions later in pregnancy
Reasons behind the US’s willingness to supply Ukraine with cluster munitions

Furthermore, the ruling forbids these agencies and officials from urging social media firms “in any manner” to try and suppress posts. This raises queries regarding what officials could state in public forums.

Doughty’s order restrains the administration from undertaking such measures while awaiting additional debates in his court, stemming from a lawsuit filed by Republican attorneys general from Missouri and Louisiana.

In their Thursday evening plea to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, lawyers, spearheaded by Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, labeled the order as “ambiguous.” They argued it might impede the Biden administration’s ability to “comment on matters of public concern and cooperate with social media companies on initiatives to avert serious harm to American citizens and our democratic processes.”

They emphasized, “The immediate and ongoing damages to the Government surpass any potential harm to the Plaintiffs should a stay be granted.”

The ruling’s detractors argue that it might hinder efforts to counter misinformation on subjects such as health and elections. However, the ruling’s advocates assert that it prevents the government from unlawfully suppressing viewpoints.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Biden administration social media order appeal

More about Biden administration social media order appeal

• Details on the Judge’s Ruling
• Biden Administration’s Appeal
• The Role of Social Media in Government
• Laws Surrounding Free Speech and Social Media
• History of Government Interactions with Social Media Platforms