Citing Zuckerberg’s election-season capitulation/gift to Rep. Jordan in 2024 saying that he regrets Facebook’s efforts to combat COVID misinformation, the court says “Given this statement by the head of one of the largest and most influential social media platforms, it is speculative at best to suggest that social media platforms would again submit to alleged governmental pressure rather than implement their own platform policies and guidelines.” Hahaha. The claims against the Stanford Defendants lack Article III standing because of a lack of traceability: “the operative complaint is devoid of any substantive allegations—plausible or otherwise—that the Stanford Defendants caused any social media platform to censor content in a manner inconsistent with the platform’s misinformation policies.” Plaintiff therefore lacks standing to assert a claim against them for the same reasons and rationale the Court identified in dismissing Plaintiff’s claim against Slavitt—namely, the fact that the Court cannot enjoin private citizens from violating another private citizen’s constitutional rights, and Plaintiff cannot obtain Bivens monetary damages because that cause of action has not been extended to these circumstances (and the Supreme Court has strongly counseled against any such extensions)….
Author: Eric Goldman
Published at: 2025-12-15 21:40:11
Still want to read the full version? Full article
