At the Supreme Court Monday, a majority of the justices seemed highly skeptical of claims that federal government officials may be broadly barred from contacts with social media platforms.was a sweeping Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that barred White House officials, FBI officials, CDC and election experts, and officials from other agencies from having contacts with social media platforms.
Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga argued that when government officials contact social media companies, even encouraging a particular course of action amounts to unconstitutional pressuring. That prompted this from Justice Barrett:"Just plain vanilla encouragement," asked Justice Barrett, her voice rising in gentle disbelief. "Or does it have to be some kind of significant encouragement, because encouragement would sweep in an awful lot.
Several justices questioned the record in the case. Justice Kagan said she did not see"even one item" that supported barring government contacts. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was even more direct telling Aguiñaga,"I have such a problem with your brief counselor. You omit information that changes the context of some of your claims. You attribute things to people who it didn't happen to... I'm not sure how we get to prove direct injury in any way.
Alluding to a statement made by President Biden at the height of the pandemic, Justice Gorsuch asked whether"an accusation by a government official that unless you change your policies, you're responsible for killing people," could be viewed as coercion?
Source: Law Daily Report (lawdailyreport.net)
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: TexasTribune - 🏆 441. / 53 Read more »
Source: washingtonpost - 🏆 95. / 72 Read more »
Source: CBSNews - 🏆 87. / 68 Read more »
Source: KPBSnews - 🏆 240. / 63 Read more »
Source: NBCNews - 🏆 10. / 86 Read more »
Source: nbcsandiego - 🏆 524. / 51 Read more »