Table of Contents
FIREstatement on Supreme Court鈥檚 grant of聽certiorari聽in聽Murthy v. Missouri

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States in Murthy v. Missouri, a case challenging efforts by federal officials to pressure social media companies into censoring disfavored views on their platforms. The Court also stayed the injunction by a federal district court in July and last month by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
FIRE agrees with the Court鈥檚 decision to hear the case, identified as Missouri v. Biden in the lower courts, which raises important questions about the constitutional limits on governmental attempts to coerce private platforms into restricting speech the government doesn鈥檛 like.
To protect freedom of expression, the government鈥檚 efforts to 鈥溾 private platforms into granting government officials a role in decisions about content moderation must fail. To that end, 果冻传媒app官方 hailed the Fifth Circuit鈥檚 decision as an important victory for freedom of expression. As narrowed by the Fifth Circuit, the injunction was a well-reasoned and carefully tailored response to impermissible governmental efforts to strong-arm social media companies into censoring speech.
While FIREdisagrees with the Court鈥檚 decision to stay the injunction, we welcome the opportunity to tell the Court why the First Amendment limits the government鈥檚 power to pressure private platforms into censorship, regardless of whether that governmental pressure comes from the left or the right.
Recent Articles
FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Trump's $16M win over '60 Minutes' edit sends chilling message to journalists everywhere

To speak or not to speak: Universities face the Kalven question

FIREstatement on聽Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton upholding age verification for adult content
