The Murthy Arguments Went So Poorly For The States That The FBI Feels Comfortable Talking To Social Media Companies Again
from the reconnecting dept
How badly did the arguments in the Murthy v. Missouri case go for the states last week? So badly that the FBI has already re-established communications with social media companies that had stopped in light of the earlier rulings in that case.
The FBI has resumed some of its efforts to share information with some American tech companies about foreign propagandists using their platforms after it ceased contact for more than half a year, multiple people familiar with the matter told NBC News.
The program, established during the Trump administration, briefed tech giants like Microsoft, Google and Meta when the U.S. intelligence community found evidence of covert influence operations using their products to mislead Americans. It was put on hold this summer in the wake of a lawsuit that accused the U.S. government of improperly pressuring tech companies about how to moderate their sitesand an aggressive inquisition from the House Judiciary Committee and its chair, Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.
This is important for a few reasons. First, many people have widely misunderstood why and how the FBI was in touch with the social media companies throughout this discussion. I tend to agree with many people that contact between private companies and the FBI should be minimal and companies should always be wary of what the FBI wants.
But, there are times that it does make sense for the FBI to be in communication, which the oral arguments made clear.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett highlighted that there clearly are times when the FBI should be in contact with the platforms. Even the lawyer for the states, Louisiana’s Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga, admitted that there were clearly cases where it would make sense for the FBI to send information to platforms, such as when there is a danger to someone, or a threat.
JUSTICE BARRETT: So the FBI can’t make –do you know how often the FBI makes those kinds of calls?
MR. AGUINAGA: And that’s why –and that’s why I have backup answer, Your Honor, which is, if you think there needs to be more, the FBI absolutely can identify certain troubling situations like that for the platforms and let the platforms take action.
But, thanks to the rulings in the lower courts, the FBI had stopped any kind of contact along those lines, for fear of violating the injunction. This is from last November:
The FBI told the House Judiciary Committee that, since the court rulings, the bureau had discovered foreign influence campaigns on social media platforms but in some cases did not inform the companies about them because they were hamstrung by the new legal oversight, according to a congressional official.
Again, it’s true that how close the FBI is with companies matters. We don’t want another scenario like with AT&T and federal intelligence apparatus, where they literally had employees embedded with each other. But, straight-up information sharing on foreign threats certainly seems reasonable.
And this is why it would still be nice if the Supreme Court drew the line in the proper place, distinguishing general information sharing about such things, and any sort of coerced pressure or threats directed at the social media companies regarding their policies or decision-making.
Filed Under: fbi, information sharing, jawboning, murthy v. missouri, social media
Comments on “The Murthy Arguments Went So Poorly For The States That The FBI Feels Comfortable Talking To Social Media Companies Again”
'Unless you opened with your weakest arguments...'
When your argument before the highest court in the US went so badly that the FBI already feels safe behaving as though you lost the case… yeah, that’s got to be more than a little humiliating.
Re:
She’s married to Josh Hawley. I don’t think humiliation is an issue.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Is this supposed to be a joke? It is the World Wide Web. Every foreign country in the world wants to be able to influence our elections to such an extent that the United Nations head quarters are in the United States of America.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Wow, lawless federal agency feels comfortable being open about its lawlessness. 👌🏻
Re:
There’s no functional premise for asserting that it’s unconstitutional for federal agencies to communicate with private businesses. That’s just batshit insane. The government couldn’t function, which may actually be the intent of your disingenuous assertion.
Re: Re:
It made them desegregate half a century ago and they’re still not over it.
Re: Re: Re:
The opposition to “DEI” is absolutely born from that specific grievance, or else conservatives wouldn’t keep using the initialism like it’s the specific racial slur they desperately want to say out loud.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
The “opposition to ‘DEI'” is born of a rational disgust at the preference-giving and/or promotion of underqualified (or often unqualified) midwit scum based solely on their self-declared affiliation with loser [purported] victim groups like inferior black people.
Re: Re: Re:3
I rest my case, Your Honor.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
Indeed. Loser inferior scum like black people should not be hired over better qualified White men (and every average White man is smarter and better qualified than every average negro).
Re: Re: Re:5
Welcome to the Techdirt comments section, Mr. Musk.
Re: Re: Re:5
At least you’ve given up pretending not be a Nazi. General Sherman should have burn the entire confederacy to the ground.
Re: Re: Re:3
Like people spouting antiquated racist pseudoscience because they’re so fragile that having to live among people with different amounts of melanin in their skin is such a horrific experience?
Re: Re: Re:3
“ midwit ”
I’d say that’s a lovely portmanteau, but we all know you’re way too fucking stupid to come up with that on purpose.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Golly Gee Wiz Christopher Wray,
Do you think any of the foregin countries might use Generative AI chatbots created by US tech companies to bombard social media with fake people trying to influence our election on the World Wide Web?!
Re:
Plenty of Americans are already willing to do exactly that.
Re:
No need. The GOP is an already an army of mechanical Turks serving that function.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
I am throwing my hat in the ring and announcing my candidacy to run for President of ALEC the American Legislative Exchange Council, where I will be in charge of the overwhelming majority of legislation in America, and can actually have a meaningful impact on the legislative process, unlike the electec political puppets that do not write or even read the legislation that they sign onto. Most of them are just habitual drunks, as everyone cn plainly see.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
The FBI does not seem to be concerned with Washington DC policy that permits illegal aliens and foreign diplomats to vote for local elections.
It looks like the government is welcoming foreign election interference with open arms taking campaign contributions from foreign countries, companies, and foreigners, and by creating the world wide web, and by having the United Nations in America.
How do you think that America is so in debt? Most of the money is going to foreign countries.
Re:
You’re conflating different parts of government, which isn’t a monolith or a hivemind. Your statement is just so vague in connections that it’s useless. Sprinkle in some xenophobia and it makes for a great heap of nothing.
Re:
Do less coke, man.
Re: Re:
Or more.
Re: Re: Re:
Solidly a betterer plan.
Re:
This is observably and demonstrably false.
Re:
Where do people get this completely delusional belief that “most of the money is going to foreign countries”? That’s like saying “Kentucky is the biggest state in America” — it not only isn’t true, it is impossible to see how someone might accidentally come to think it is true.
I guess maybe if you count all US military spending as “money going to other countries” (in the sense that we buy very expensive bombs and then drop them on foreigners), you could claim that most discretionary spending “goes to other countries”. That’s the best I can come up with.
Re: Re:
Enough people also can’t tell the difference between trade, trade deficits, and national debt, so there’s that, too. Probably some things i missed. Of course, some may know the difference while hoping others do not.
Re: Re: Re:
And they don’t understand trade tariffs and how that affects domestic prices.
Re: Re:
Tucker Carlson says so while he makes a stupid face, so it must be true.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
You stupid shitte they're sending FBI agents to people's home's over memes
https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1773504632763166736
That is intimidation. It is a 1A violation. It is the kinda shite that happens in dictator states.
You are supporting fascism. (ironic, I know) The boldness of the FBI has nothing to do with the surety of their legal standing that’s the whole fuucking problem.
You’re a stupid assshole lying for tyrants. You will either live to regret your choice or berate those who saved you from it.
Re:
You may need to adjust your meds.
Re:
Re:
You haven’t seen the post, Matty, so you don’t know what the “meme” actually consisted of.
Additionally, other reposts of this event mention that the woman had posted pro-Palestine messages, and given the emotions involved in that conflict, it’s not outside the realm of possibility that her post(s) were so inflammatory that it caused Facebook to contact the authorities.
In short, you don’t have the whole story, so shut up with the conspiracy theories until you do.
Re: Re:
I think it’s best to give “that poster” the Costanza treatment and assume that whatever they say is the opposite of how things actually are in the real world.
Re: Re: Re:
You also might not want to make them your latex salesman.
Re:
You’re literally submitting stochastic terrorism as evidence. Not sure if that’s better or worse than submitting Hunter Biden’s dick as evidence.
Re:
“ You will either live to regret your choice or berate those who saved you from it.”
The level of projection here chefs kiss