RFK Jr.'s Request for Injunction Against Google Denied by Appeals Court
On August 26, the federal appeals court rejected a bid to prevent Google from removing videos of Robert F. Kennedy. The court ruled that Kennedy failed to prove that Google acted as a state entity when it decided to take down the videos.
Kennedy's Lawyers Request Preliminary Injunction
Kennedy's legal team requested a preliminary injunction, arguing that Google was following government officials' advice when it removed several videos for allegedly breaching the company's medical misinformation policy. They wanted an injunction to stop Google from removing more videos from Kennedy's YouTube page.
The lawyers argued in their motion, "Whether Americans agree with Mr. Kennedy’s views or not, whether they vote for Kennedy or reject him, our Constitution demands that voters have an unrestricted opportunity to hear Mr. Kennedy speak. This is the only way they can make an informed decision when exercising their right to vote."
Google countered by stating it was merely implementing its own policy and urged the court to reject the request.
Google Not a State Actor, Says District Judge
In 2023, U.S. District Judge Trina L. Thompson sided with Google. She found that Kennedy failed to prove Google as a state actor, and hence, the First Amendment rights of the U.S. Constitution were not implicated.
Court precedent dictates that private entities can be regarded as a state actor if they are shown to have acted under "coercive power" or "significant encouragement" from government officials.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld this ruling on Monday.
Appeals Court Upholds Ruling
The three-judge panel of the appeals court unanimously declared, "Google asserts that it is a private entity with its own First Amendment rights and that it removed Kennedy’s videos of its own accord according to its misinformation policy and not at the behest of the federal government. Kennedy has not countered Google’s claim that it independently chose to remove his videos."
The judges added, "Kennedy has not pointed out any specific communications from a federal official to Google about the removed Kennedy videos, or identified any threatening or coercive communication, veiled or otherwise, from a federal official to Google concerning Kennedy. As Kennedy has not shown that Google acted as a state actor in removing his videos, his invocation of First Amendment rights is misplaced."
The panel included U.S. Circuit Judges Consuelo M. Callahan and Gabriel P. Sanchez, and U.S. District Judge John A. Kronstadt, who was sitting by designation.
Google did not respond to a request for comment.
Kennedy's Lawyer Disappointed with Ruling
Scott James Street, Kennedy's lawyer, expressed disappointment with the ruling, stating, "This unpublished opinion leaves much to be desired. It contains no analysis, much less meaningful discussion of the important First Amendment issues raised in the case."
He added, "Given the lack of meaningful analysis, we plan to move the case forward, both in the trial court and, if necessary, in the Supreme Court."
Kennedy, an independent, suspended his campaign this month and announced his support for former President Donald Trump.
Bottom Line
The decision by the appeals court to deny Kennedy's request for an injunction against Google raises questions about the role of private companies in content regulation and the boundaries of the First Amendment. As the debate continues, it's crucial to consider the balance between freedom of speech and the responsibility of platforms to prevent the spread of misinformation. What are your thoughts on this matter? Be sure to share this article with your friends. Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Briefing, available every day at 6pm.
