WASHINGTON, Oct. 8 (UPI) — Lawmakers and witnesses emphasized the threat government censorship poses to First Amendment rights during a congressional hearing Wednesday, with Republicans citing what they called Biden administration censorship of social media and Democrats focusing on what they said was weaponization of free speech by the Trump administration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The hearing followed an investigation led by Sen. Ted Cruz<\/a>, R-Texas, on the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s role in what a panel report described as “jawboning” big tech companies into disproportionately silencing conservative viewpoints during the Biden presidency. Cruz sponsored the hearing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The hearing was called “Shut Your App: How Uncle Sam Jawboned Big Tech Into Silencing Americans.” The practice of jawboning refers to the “inappropriate demands made of private actors by government officials,” according to a paper published by the Cato Institute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In a report outlining the investigation, the committee found that CISA “acted outside both the First Amendment and its own authority” by conducting a censorship campaign of “constitutionally protected speech.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Supreme Court<\/a> reviewed these censorship claims in a 2024 case styled Murthy vs. Missouri and sided with the Biden administration in a 6-3 ruling, citing that the plaintiffs lacked sufficient standing to sue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The premise of the case centered on whether the federal government violated the First Amendment by allegedly pressuring social media platforms to censor certain types of speech.<\/p>\n\n\n\n On Wednesday, Democrats criticized the panel’s report findings and the direction that the hearing was taking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “This hearing is a farce,” said Sen. Ed Markey<\/a>, D-Mass. “We are not focusing on the imminent threat to the First Amendment, the beating heart of democracy.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Markey noted that the committee is “relitigating an issue that the Supreme Court has already decided” and focused his questioning on what he described as ongoing threats by the Trump administration to revoke media outlets’ access and licenses based on their “editorial decisions.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the majority opinion issued in June 2024 by Justice Amy Coney Barrett<\/a> wrote that “The plaintiffs failed to show a direct causal link between government actions and the suppression of their speech.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Democrats also tailored their remarks and questioning to the role Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr played in ABC’s temporary suspension of Jimmy Kimmel<\/a>‘s late night show.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In an appearance on conservative Benny Johnson’s podcast last month, Carr said, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” in reference to what ABC and local affiliates should do following Kimmel’s comments on the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Hours later, ABC announced it was suspending Kimmel’s show.<\/p>\n\n\n\n