SCOTUS: Plaintiffs lack standing in social-media coercion case (Murthy v. Missouri)
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 26, 2024, that neither state nor individual plaintiffs established standing to enjoin federal officials over alleged coercion of social-media platforms. Justice Barrett’s majority opinion found plaintiffs failed to show government actions caused platforms to moderate their specific posts, noting platforms had independently moderated similar content before government involvement. The Court avoided ruling on First Amendment questions about government jawboning, deciding on narrow procedural grounds instead.
Key Actors
Sources (7)
- Murthy v. Missouri Opinion (2024-06-26)
- Supreme Court Throws Out Challenge to Biden Administration Social Media Contacts (2024-06-26)
- Supreme Court Dodges Key Question in Murthy v. Missouri (2024-07-01)
- Just in time for the debates, Meta fixes bug impacting users' political content settings on Instagram and Threads (2024-06-27)
- A Meta 'error' broke the political content filter on Threads and Instagram (2024-06-26)
- Instagram and Threads are now filtering political content out of your feed. Change this setting to see more of it (2024-06-26)
- Some creators say they're frustrated after Instagram starts limiting political content recommendations (2024-06-26)
Help Improve This Timeline
Found an error or have additional information? You can help improve this event.
Edit: Opens GitHub editor to submit corrections or improvements via pull request.
Suggest: Opens a GitHub issue to propose a new event for the timeline.