Trump sues social media sites, alleging censorship; experts say cases have only a slim chance.
“It is part of the First Amendment right of Twitter and Facebook that they can decide for themselves which material ... to post.” Ilya Somin, law professor at George Mason University
Federal lawsuits filed by former President Donald Trump on Wednesday against Facebook, Twitter and Google’s YouTube are seeking to address what he claims are unfair censorship practices against himself and other conservatives.
Legal experts and scholars said the cases likely have a slim chance of succeeding, but that they may be more important as political messaging and in spotlighting how central social media has become to government figures.
The suit tries to paint the social media giants as state actors bound by and in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits government limits on free speech.
“It seems to me that this is almost certainly without merit,” said Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University. Somin said instead it would be a violation of the Constitution to force the companies to post certain content.
“It is part of the First Amendment right of Twitter and Facebook that they can decide for themselves which material they want to post and which material they don’t,” Somin said.
He added that however unlikely the case was to succeed, the legal ramifications for companies
ranging from tech to media would be huge and potentially allow any oped or tweet that is rejected or taken down to be disputed on constitutional grounds.
That seemed a remote possibility, Somin said, noting, “Basic First Amendment law says private organizations are not the government.”
Facebook declined to comment on the case via email, as did a Twitter spokesperson. Google did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields companies like Facebook and Twitter from legal liability for what users post there. The suits ask the courts to declare that part of the law “unconstitutional.”
Voices on both sides of the political aisle have called for changes to the law, but Somin said weakening it, as some suggested, could lead to strict censorship by companies worried about getting sued for what other people say on their sites.
Twitter permanently suspended Trump’s account, his favorite bullhorn, after the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection and in light of his repeated and false claims that he won the 2020 election.
Facebook also blocked Trump from its site after the Capitol riots. The company said last month his accounts will stay off the site for two years and that he will be potentially eligible to begin posting again before the next presidential election.
Whatever the lawsuit’s legal fortunes, it draws attention to a common conservative refrain that liberal tech monopolies are in cahoots with Democrats in national office to censor their voices.
To that end, the suit is seeking classaction status on behalf of similarly situated people who feel their voices have been unfairly pushed off the immensely popular and powerful sites.
Beyond the courtroom, the suit underscores how central social media has become for politicians of all persuasions and nationalities to influence voters and pursue and hold power, said Jennifer Grygiel, an associate professor at Syracuse University who studies social media and government propaganda.
“When your government is in a position to exert influence over some of these platforms and push out more propaganda, the motivation becomes who can push out the most amount of propaganda,” said Grygiel, who uses they/them pronouns.
“That’s not good for democracy,” and subverts the role of the free press, Grygiel said. They noted that while President Joe Biden’s use of social media like Twitter may be less incendiary than Trump’s infamously bombthrowing approach, “It’s still concerning when any president can have such a large audience” and bypass traditional channels and factchecking.
While the argument joining Facebook and the U.S. government at the hip may face long odds, citizens should be concerned about how their governments use and in some cases abuse social media, Grygiel said.
“Facebook is not the state, but the state is using Facebook,” Grygiel said. “And that is scary.”