By John Hinderaker
[PowerLine] Perhaps the most important case now wending its way through the federal courts is State of Missouri v. Biden. In that case, the states of Missouri and Louisiana, along with individuals including Jay Bhattacharya and Jim Hoft, allege that various federal agencies violated their First Amendment rights by leaning on social media platforms to censor their speech. Yesterday, in a 3-0 decision, a panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court decision in plaintiffs’ favor as to the White House, the FBI, the Centers for Disease Control and the Surgeon General, finding that those agencies improperly coerced social media platforms, including Facebook and Twitter, in violation of the Constitution. Scott wrote about the decision here.
The decision, which I think is impressively well-reasoned, is embedded below. I encourage you to read it; you probably can skip the lengthy discussion of standing. The starting point is that the Constitution constrains government, not private parties. So the question is, when does conduct undertaken by a private party (a social media platform) become state action for purposes of the First Amendment?
The opinion poses the question this way:
Read the rest at the link 
|
