The FBI is intensifying its efforts to censor information as the 2024 presidential election approaches by enhancing its coordination with social media platforms. A recent memo reveals that the agency began a discreet operation in February aimed at controlling information deemed to be “foreign malign influence.”
According to a Department of Justice memo dated July 12, 2024, Associate Deputy Attorney General George D. Turner noted that the Biden administration has sought to suppress information it identifies as FMI following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Murthy v. Missouri. This ruling, decided in June, significantly impacted the First Amendment by undermining free speech protections.
After the Supreme Court stayed a 5th Circuit injunction in October 2023, which had restricted the FBI's collaboration with tech companies, the DOJ started developing a uniform approach for sharing FMI-related information with social media companies while “still considering First Amendment rights”, according to the memo. The FBI began implementing this approach in early February 2024 and has been consistently sharing FMI threat information with these companies. The FBI also plans to resume regular meetings with social media firms to discuss potential FMI threats on their platforms.
The DOJ’s Justice Manual provides guidelines for determining whether to disclose FMI operations, especially when alleged operations involve spreading covert foreign government propaganda or disinformation. However, not all claims of FMI are accurate.
Before the 2020 presidential election, a group of 51 former intelligence officials signed a letter falsely suggesting that the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation. This letter, allegedly prompted by Antony Blinken, then a senior adviser to Biden’s campaign, was misleading. The laptop had been verified by the FBI in November 2019 and later used in a federal gun case. Despite knowing the laptop’s authenticity, the FBI alerted social media companies about purported “Russian propaganda” and “hack-and-leak operations,” leading platforms like Twitter and Facebook to restrict the story’s visibility. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg later admitted that his platform had suppressed the story following the FBI’s warning.
In Murthy v. Missouri, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the federal government could continue its collaboration with tech companies to censor content it finds objectionable. Louisiana and Missouri had sued the Biden administration for coordinating with social media to censor posts deemed unfavorable, even if they were factually correct. The Court ruled that the plaintiffs did not have standing.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s majority opinion inaccurately characterized Facebook’s censorship as a measure against foreign interference, despite the Hunter Biden laptop not being related to any Russian disinformation campaign. Justice Samuel Alito, in his dissent, criticized the decision as “blatantly unconstitutional” and warned that the Court’s ruling might have regrettable consequences. He expressed concern that sophisticated coercive campaigns could evade scrutiny, which he believed was a troubling precedent.
