Supreme Court tackles government coercion claims in social media and NRA cases
The Supreme Court will weigh the circumstances under which the government can be found to cross the line from persuasion to coercion in cases involving two contentious issues: problematic social media posts and gun rights.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday is weighing the circumstances under which the government can be found to cross the line from persuasion to coercion, hearing arguments in cases involving two contentious issues: problematic social media posts and gun rights.
The court is first hearing arguments over concerns that the Biden administration’s contacts with social media companies, including efforts to have content removed on issues like Covid, constituted unlawful coercion.
The justices will then hear a similar case on claims that a New York state official inappropriately pressured companies to end ties with the National Rifle Association, the leading gun rights group.
At issue is a practice known as “jawboning,” in which the government leans on private parties to do what it wants, sometimes with the implicit threat of adverse consequences if demands are not met. Those challenging the government actions say that in each case there was a violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment, which protects free speech rights.
“Both cases are about the extent to which the government should be allowed to interject itself into public debate,” said Alex Abdo, a lawyer at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. While the government has a right to participate, it should not have “too much of a hand in distorting our conversations,” he added.
Rating: 5