Warner Warns That Social Media Injunction Harms U.S. Security
It’s a “national security imperative” that government officials can “engage with social media platforms about foreign malign influence targeting their users,” Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., said in a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief Tuesday (docket 23-411). His…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
brief supports government petitioners in Murthy v. Missouri who seek to vacate the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ social media injunction against officials from the White House and four federal agencies. The injunction is stayed, pending completion of the SCOTUS review (see 2310230003). If the injunction gains effect, it would bar officials from the White House, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the FBI and the surgeon general's office from coercing or significantly encouraging the social media platforms to moderate their content. An injunction “would prevent or limit the government’s ability to communicate with social media companies,” and would leave the U.S. “vulnerable to attack,” said the brief. Foreign malign influence campaigns have grown in number, scope and sophistication since 2016, it added. Any progress gained through improved threat sharing processes “may be entirely lost if the injunction is not lifted,” the brief said. Even while stayed, the injunction has reduced the intelligence community’s threat-sharing capacity, it said.