This was a comment I made to an August 8 blog post Court Rejects TRO Request That Argued X Became a Government Forum When Musk Worked for the Government - Reason.com on the Volokh Conspiracy.
There have been multiple blog posts about this case now on the Volokh Conspiracy. Both posts simply quote from Starr's orders without any analysis or context. It appears that Mr. Volokh has not read the other key documents that relate to Starr's orders because Starr's characterizations are being presented (as fact) rather than the misleading spin they actually are.
"As counsel in this case, I should clarify some important context that Judge Starr's excerpted order omits. The "novel argument" characterization is misleading - the state action doctrine has well-established precedent for cases involving significant government entanglement. What makes this case unique is the unprecedented situation where the head of a major social media platform simultaneously serves as head of a federal department (DOGE) while that platform systematically suppresses criticism of his government role.
Recent reporting confirms Musk's government influence continues through DOGE and new executive orders, further expanding his role. The case involves over 67,000 pieces of religious and political content that were removed or shadowbanned, much of it scholarly biblical commentary.
The court's dismissal as "novel" sidesteps serious constitutional questions about when private platforms become state actors through such extraordinary government integration. These are concrete First Amendment issues affecting a biblical scholar's ability to share religious expression in an era of unprecedented government-platform entanglement."
Case filings are available at Richards v. X Corp, 3:25-cv-00916 – CourtListener.com
No comments:
Post a Comment