What happened
The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected an effort by Republican-led states to prevent the federal government from contacting social media companies to flag misinformation. The 6-3 decision, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, said the states and other parties didn’t have standing to sue the Biden administration.
In a separate 6-3 decision, the justices overturned the bribery conviction of a former Indiana mayor, ruling that federal anti-corruption laws only criminalize bribes given before a public act, not rewards doled out afterward. The Supreme Court also “inadvertently and briefly,” according to a spokesperson, published a draft opinion suggesting the court will allow emergency abortions in Idaho, temporarily blocking a near-total state ban.
Who said what
The social media ruling was a “technical if important election-year victory” that avoided “weighty First Amendment questions,” CNN said. The decision, The Wall Street Journal said, “capped a wild ride for a case” tied to “persistent claims that conservative viewpoints” about Covid-19 vaccines, lockdowns and election rules “were being censored online.”
The bribery ruling “continues a pattern in recent years of the court restricting the government’s ability to use broad federal laws to prosecute public corruption cases,” The Associated Press said. It also landed “as the court faces increased scrutiny over its ethics practices,” The New York Times said, following “months of revelations” about luxury travel and other gifts Justice Clarence Thomas received and did not report.
What next?
The justices have “another major social media case to decide in the coming days” on the “validity of efforts by Florida and Texas to regulate platforms’ content moderation practices,” the Journal said.