Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Shocks with Her First Amendment Views

In a Supreme Court debate on Monday challenging the alleged coordination between the Biden administration and Big Tech to censor certain messages, one justice's remarks about the government's relationship with the First Amendment drew attention.

The case originated from a lawsuit by Republican-led states Missouri and Louisiana, accusing high-ranking government officials of collaborating with major social media companies under the pretext of combatting misinformation, leading to the censorship of speech.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson raises eyebrows with comment that First Amendment “hamstrings" government https://t.co/DNzdFKcLyf

— Fox News (@FoxNews) March 18, 2024

The states contended that this constituted a violation of the First Amendment.

During nearly two hours of oral arguments, the justices deliberated on whether the Biden administration had crossed constitutional boundaries and whether its engagement with private companies constituted permissible persuasion or illegal coercion.

Justice Samuel Alito commented, "It's got these big clubs available to it, and so it's treating Facebook and these other platforms like their subordinates."

In contrast, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson took a different stance, suggesting that the First Amendment might excessively limit the federal government, particularly during critical periods.

"Your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the federal government in significant ways in the most important time periods," she told the lawyer representing Louisiana, Missouri, and private plaintiffs.

"The government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country... by encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information," she added.

The lawsuit alleges that 67 federal agencies and officials coerced platforms like Facebook and Twitter to censor individual posts, primarily related to COVID-19 restrictions and the 2020 presidential election results. U.S. District Court Judge Terry A.

Doughty imposed a temporary injunction last year, later extended by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, prohibiting officials from coercing or significantly encouraging changes in online content.

During Monday's oral arguments, conservative justices expressed skepticism about the government's actions, while others raised concerns about excessively restricting federal authority, including scenarios involving online epidemics.