BY SRH
In Washington, D.C., The U.S. Supreme Court did not hold Facebook and Meta responsible for working with the government to quiet speech that is protected by the First Amendment. This is a blow to First Amendment rights.
The Rutherford Institute warns that social media companies will likely once again be used as go-betweens for government censorship if there isn’t a clear decision that holds Meta accountable as a state actor. This is especially true during times of crisis or political pressure.
Rutherford Institute lawyers asked the Supreme Court to hear the appeal in Children’s Health Defense v. Meta. They said that Meta was acting as the government by working with federal officials to block views that were critical of the government’s COVID-19 policies. This included posts by Children’s Health Defense (CHD). Meta tried to avoid the problem by saying that the case was no longer relevant since the plague was over and the president had changed. However, Meta paid $25 million earlier this year to settle a similar First Amendment lawsuit made by Donald Trump in 2021. This amount has been called a political payoff to avoid scrutiny by critics.
“We are very close to reaching a point where the government doesn’t have to directly police speech.” According to John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the government instead hires corporations like Facebook and YouTube to do its dirty work. “The Supreme Court’s decision not to step in sets a bad example, letting the government and social media companies work together behind closed doors while ignoring the Constitution.” The next time the government thinks that certain points of view are too dangerous, inconvenient, or politically incorrect, these companies will feel free to silence speech again if we don’t speak out now.
