Plaintiffs in Murthy v Missouri argue White House requests to take down coronavirus misinformation violate first amendment
The supreme court heard oral arguments on Monday in a case that could upend the federal government’s relationship with social media companies and with lies online. Plaintiffs in Murthy v Missouri argue that White House requests to take down coronavirus misinformation on Twitter and Facebook constitute illegal censorship in violation the first amendment.
The arguments began with Brian Fletcher, the principal deputy solicitor general of the justice department, making an argument that none of the government’s communications crossed the line from persuasion into coercion. He also pushed back against descriptions of events in lower court rulings, stating that they were misleading or included quotations taken out of context.
About Author
More Stories
Researchers create AI-based tool that restores age-damaged artworks in hours
DNA testing firm 23andMe fined £2.3m by UK regulator for 2023 data hack
23andMe’s founder wins bid to regain control of bankrupt DNA testing firm