The Justice Department filed a motion to pause the effects of a federal court ruling that prohibits Biden administration officials from communicating with social media companies about certain content.
In a memorandum sent Thursday evening to the District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, attorneys argued the defendants “will suffer irreparable harm absent a stay of the preliminary injunction,” requesting a stay pending appeal, which would halt the commencement of sentencing while an appeal is in process.
CRUEL SUMMER: BIDEN FACES BRUISING FEW WEEKS OF SETBACKS AND SCANDAL
The order is part of a lawsuit launched by two Republicans, Lousiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, against the Biden administration in 2022. It claimed officials violated the First Amendment because they “significantly encouraged” and “coerced” social media platforms to conceal protected free speech posted on platforms.
Defendants filed a notice of appeal Wednesday evening following a preliminary injunction from U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, who ruled Biden administration officials can’t communicate with social media companies regarding “the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech posted on social-media platforms.”
Doughty, a Trump appointee, wrote in the preliminary injunction that the Republican plaintiffs will likely be successful in their case “on the merits in establishing that the Government has used its power to silence the opposition.”
In the preliminary injunction, Doughty included several topics that he deemed the Biden administration attempted to suppress due to opposition: COVID-19 vaccines, COVID-19 masking and lockdowns, the. COVID-19 lab leak theory, the validity of the 2020 election, President Joe Biden’s policies, policies of the government officials in power, and the validity of the Hunter Biden laptop story.
The motion applies to several social media companies, which include "Facebook/Meta, Twitter, YouTube/Google, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, TikTok,” and other online platforms.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The stay filing argues the preliminary injunction is unclear about what entities and people are covered, naming the Department of Justice as an example Doughty listed, but defendants noted the agency is “composed of many sub-components whose actions are not challenged by Plaintiffs in this case."
Attorneys wrote that if the court denies the plea, defendants request an alternative option of granting “an administrative stay of the preliminary injunction for seven days to allow time for the Fifth Circuit to consider an emergency motion to stay and request for administrative stay.”