Just as we said — the matter is now in better hands. [Prior backgrounder of mine, on it, here.]

The Fifth Circuit, while largely conservative, will assign this by lot — to a three judge panel. It is hard to see a scenario where a stay is not granted. Here’s a bit, from the motion for a stay:

. . .One of the central prerogatives of the President and Executive Branch officials is to speak to members of the American public — including American companies — about how they can help mitigate threats to the Nation. From President Kennedy’s exhortation for steel companies to lower their prices to President Trump’s efforts to encourage companies to keep American jobs onshore, presidents and other officials have long exercised the power of persuasion to advance their vision of the public good. While the government may not coerce private parties to act on its behalf to achieve indirectly what it could not do directly, courts have set a high threshold for finding such coercion to give the government sufficient latitude to “advocate and defend its own policies.” Board of Regents of the Univ. of Wis. Sys. v. Southworth, 529 U.S. 217, 229 (2000).

Here, however, the district court issued a universal injunction with sweeping language that could be read to prohibit (among other things) virtually any government communication directed at social-media platforms regarding content moderation….

The injunction reflects numerous legal errors. The district court adopted a theory of state parens patriae standing that the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected, including as recently as last month. The court’s conclusion that the individual plaintiffs have standing rests on a handful of past episodes of content moderation by private actors, without any showing that any government action will cause future harm to plaintiffs. The court’s merits analysis reflects an insupportably broad view of what interactions can make the government responsible for private parties’ actions. And the injunction vastly exceeds the court’s equitable powers. It forbids conduct having nothing to do with plaintiffs, cannot be regarded as necessary to prevent irreparable harm, lacks the requisite specificity, and will significantly and irreparably harm the government and the public. This Court should stay it….

Indeed — onward now, to a very short fuse on a reply from the plaintiffs — then a stay ruling from the Fifth Circuit panel, I’d expect. Grin.

नमस्ते

The federal government / Biden Administration has — as we said — appealed all this, as of the evening of the Fifth. As of last night, it had moved for an interim stay, for very good reason (directly in spite of the loony bleating of Scott Johnson to the contrary):

Aside from the substantive errors of law we’ve mentioned, the Administration pointed out that the states (Mizzou, and Louisiana) waited over 40 days to even ask for an injunction, then took a year to “gather evidence.” Then, after more than a year, USDC Judge Doughty decided this was all a burning emergency (coincidentally on July 4 itself), and drove to the office — and issued the prelim. injunction, as an extraordinary measure. Where was the exigency, for a… full year, folks?

So, yes, a stay of this nonsense is plainly… warranted:

. . .Defendants respectfully request an administrative stay of the preliminary injunction for seven days to allow time for the Fifth Circuit to consider an emergency motion to stay and request for administrative stay. Defendants respectfully request that the Court rule on this motion by 12 p.m. CT on Monday, July 10, 2023 so that Defendants may promptly seek appellate relief, if necessary….

We shall see, but if the states have anything sensible in opposition, they must answer by 8 a.m., Bayou time, Monday. So there should be some scrambled Sunday night filings from those red states, and likely dripping with overwrought drama (of the political, not legal, sort) to boot, out of Mizzou’s — and Louisiana’s — AGs. Hilarious. [Bill Otis also makes bleating noises — largely incoherent — about the trial judge’s wisdom here, on Sunday night. Hilarious.]

Off now, to put baby girl on an overnight British Airways flight to Heathrow… smile.

नमस्ते