Government and Social Media Regulation

Louisiana and Missouri have secured a 10‑year consent decree in their First Amendment 'jawboning' lawsuit that bars the U.S. Surgeon General’s office, the CDC, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency from threatening or coercing social media companies to remove or suppress constitutionally protected speech, or from directing or vetoing platforms’ moderation decisions. The suit, filed in 2022 by the two Republican‑led states and several individuals, alleged that Biden‑era officials and some Trump‑era FBI officials pressured platforms including Facebook, Twitter/X and YouTube to curb posts about COVID‑19, election security and the Hunter Biden laptop story in ways that effectively turned private moderation into state censorship. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill and Sen. Eric Schmitt, who initiated the case while Missouri’s AG, are calling the settlement a 'historic' and 'operational' check on what they label a federal 'censorship machine,' arguing discovery showed officials crossed the line between government speech and coercion. The decree comes after disclosures that FBI agents warned platforms ahead of the 2020 election about a possible Russian 'hack‑and‑leak' operation, a warning companies later cited in their handling of the New York Post’s laptop reporting, and lands amid intense partisan and online debate over how government should communicate with tech firms about misinformation without trampling free speech. The agreement does not bar all contact between these agencies and platforms, but it sharply narrows what they can do when it comes to influencing the removal or suppression of lawful content, setting a precedent other states and plaintiffs are likely to test.