- Madrid's Carvajal to miss several months after serious knee injury
- Israel pounds Lebanon ahead of Hamas attack anniversary
- Two elephants die in flash flooding in northern Thailand
- Sabalenka targets world number one and Wuhan hat-trick
- Toddler among 4 dead in migrant Channel crossings
- Tunisia votes with Saied set for re-election
- Bagnaia sets 'example' with Japan MotoGP win to cut gap on Martin
- Intense Israeli bombing rocks Beirut ahead of war anniversary
- Mozambique vote: no suspense but some disillusion
- Austrian rapper channels anti-racist rage in Romani hip-hop songs
- Ohtani magic powers Dodgers over Padres in MLB playoff thriller
- Five of the best: Pakistan-England Test thrillers
- Man sets arm on fire as marches across US mark Gaza war anniversary
- Vietnam's young coffee entrepreneurs brew up a revolution
- Trump rallies at site of failed assassination: 'Never quit'
- Too hot by day, Dubai's floodlit beaches are packed at night
- Is music finally reckoning with #MeToo?
- Fans hail Trump's 'guts' as he returns to site of rally shooting
- Lebanon state media says 'very violent' Israeli strikes hit south Beirut
- Guardians maul Tigers, miracle Mets rally in MLB series openers
- Lebanon state media says Israeli strikes hit south Beirut
- Miami on track for MLS record points after win in Toronto
- Madrid beat Villarreal but Carvajal suffers knee injury
- Madrid beat Villarreal to move level with Liga leaders Barcelona
- Monaco take top spot in Ligue 1 with win at Rennes
- French rugby player on rape charge whistled but 'serene' on return
- Madrid beat Villarreal to level Liga leaders Barca
- Thuram treble fires Inter past Torino and up to second
- 'Fight': defiant Trump jets in to site of rally shooting
- Toddler among 3 dead in migrant Channel crossings
- Mexico City's new mayor sworn in with pledges on water, housing
- Israel on alert ahead of Hamas attack anniversary
- Guardians maul Tigers in MLB playoff series opener
- Macron criticises Israel on Gaza, Lebanon operations
- French rugby player whistled but 'serene' on return amid ongoing rape case
- Kovacic stars as Man City sink Fulham to get title bid back on track
- Retegui hat-trick fires five-star Atalanta to hammering of Genoa
- Heavyweights Australia, England off to World Cup winning starts
- Visiting UN refugee agency chief decries 'terrible crisis' in Lebanon
- Spinners come to party as England defeat Bangladesh at T20 World Cup
- Search continues for missing in deadly Bosnia floods
- Man City sink Fulham to get title bid back on track
- France's Auradou whistled on Pau return in Perpignan loss amid ongoing rape case
- A 'forgotten' valley in storm-hit North Carolina, desperate for help
- Arsenal hit back in style after Southampton scare
- Thousands march for Palestinians ahead of Oct 7 anniversary
- Hezbollah heir apparent Safieddine out of contact after strikes
- Liverpool stay top of Premier League as Arsenal, Man City win
- In dank Tour of Emilia, Pogacar shines in rainbow jersey
- DR Congo launches mpox vaccination drive, hoping to curb outbreak
US Supreme Court skeptical of curbing govt contact with social media firms
A majority of justices on the US Supreme Court appeared skeptical on Monday of efforts to impose restrictions on federal government efforts to curb misinformation online.
Both conservative and liberal justices on the nine-member court appeared reluctant to endorse a lower court's ruling that would severely limit government interactions with social media companies.
The case stems from a lawsuit brought by the Republican attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri, who allege that government officials went too far in their bid to get platforms to combat vaccine and election misinformation, violating the First Amendment free speech rights of users.
The lower court restricted top officials and agencies of Democratic President Joe Biden's administration from meeting and communicating with social media companies to moderate their content.
The ruling, which the Supreme Court put on hold until it heard the case, was a win for conservative advocates who allege that the government pressured or colluded with platforms such as Facebook and X, formerly Twitter, to censor right-leaning content under the guise of fighting misinformation.
Representing the Justice Department in the Supreme Court on Monday, Principal Deputy Solicitor General Brian Fletcher said there is a "fundamental distinction between persuasion and coercion."
"The government may not use coercive threats to suppress speech, but it is entitled to speak for itself by informing, persuading or criticizing private speakers," he said.
The lower court, Fletcher said, "mistook persuasion for coercion."
Justice Samuel Alito, a conservative, said the record showed that government officials had engaged in "constant pestering of Facebook and some of the other platforms" treating them "like their subordinates."
"I cannot imagine federal officials taking that approach to the print media," Alito said.
But Chief Justice John Roberts, also a conservative, said the federal government does not speak with one voice.
"The government is not monolithic," Roberts said. "That has to dilute the concept of coercion significantly, doesn't it?"
Fletcher said interactions between health officials and social media platforms at the heart of the case needed to be viewed in light of "an effort to get Americans vaccinated during a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic."
"There was a concern that Americans were getting their news about the vaccine from these platforms and the platforms were promoting bad information," Fletcher said, adding that "the platforms were moderating content long before the government was talking to them."
- 'No place in our democracy' -
J. Benjamin Aguinaga, the solicitor general of Louisiana, denounced what he called "government censorship," saying it has "no place in our democracy."
"The government has no right to persuade platforms to violate Americans' constitutional rights, and pressuring platforms in backrooms shielded from public view is not using the bully pulpit at all," Aguinaga said. "That's just being a bully."
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a liberal, pushed back, saying "my biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways."
"Some might say that the government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country." she said.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative, asked whether it would be coercion if someone in government calls up a social media company to point out something that is "factually erroneous information."
The lower court order applied to the White House and a slew of agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the State Department, the Justice Department as well as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The decision restricted agencies and officials from meeting with social media companies or flagging posts.
Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry hailed the "historic injunction" at the time, saying it would prevent the Biden administration from "censoring the core political speech of ordinary Americans" on social media.
He accused federal officials of seeking to "dictate what Americans can and cannot say on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other platforms about COVID-19, elections, criticism of the government, and more."
Some experts in misinformation and First Amendment law criticized the lower court ruling, saying the authorities needed to strike a balance between calling out falsehoods and veering towards censorship or curbing free speech.
L.Davis--AMWN