Mayer Brown Leads Legal Fight Against Trump's Executive Order Targeting Social Media Companies
The lawsuit claims the president's order violates the free speech protections of social media companies and its users.
June 02, 2020 at 07:10 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
The Center for Democracy and Technology has sued President Donald Trump over an executive order seeking to crack down on social media companies' "selective censorship" after Twitter flagged one of the president's posts as potentially misleading.
Mayer Brown is representing the Washington, D.C.-based tech policy nonprofit in one of the first legal challenges to the executive order delegating several agencies to review Section 230, a provision within the Communications Decency Act shielding online companies from liability for user-generated content.
The complaint, filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that the order violates the free speech protections of social media companies and its users, and seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining the Trump administration from enforcing the order.
The center's incoming general counsel, Avery Gardiner, who filed the complaint alongside a Mayer Brown team led by Andrew Pincus in Washington, D.C., said, "The main goal of the suit is to defend basic First Amendment freedoms for all of us. What this executive order does is threaten all of our rights to speak freely online."
Gardiner said she expects to see more challenges from public interest-oriented groups across the political spectrum, as well as some companies pushing back against the restrictions.
The order came shortly after Twitter fact-checked a post from the president claiming that mail-in ballots would lead to voter fraud.
Gardiner said that in these "incredibly difficult times," referring to the national protests over the death of George Floyd, the group worries about any online affront to free speech, but that the president threatening the ability of social media platforms to moderate speech about elections is "mind-blowingly terrifying and needs to stop."
"It's not just about what he's trying to do against Twitter," she said. "He is not just sending a shot across the bow, but a shot into the hull of any online platform that accepts user-generated content."
The order enlists the U.S. attorney general to form a working group of state attorneys general to review current state statutes that could enforce prohibitions on online content moderation and propose federal legislation. The presidential action also seeks to begin a Federal Communications Commission rulemaking process to propose regulations clarifying Section 230. Both procedures would likely not have an immediate effect on online free speech.
"The order says very, very loudly that if you speak in ways that I don't like, I will find a way to make your life painful, and that's a very damaging message, even if some of the specific effects of the order don't come into effect for a period of time," she said.
A White House representative did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday afternoon.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: After a 74-Day Trial, Shook Fends Off Claims From Artist’s Heirs Against UMB Bank
An ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
‘It's Your Funeral’: Avoiding Doing Damage to Your Client’s Case With Uncivil Behavior
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250