The Biden administration colluded with social media platforms to censor and suppress truthful information, Republican attorneys general in Missouri and Louisiana alleged in a lawsuit Thursday. Filed by Missouri AG Eric Schmitt and Louisiana AG Jeff Landry, the lawsuit names President Joe Biden, Press Secretary Jen Psaki, Chief Medical Adviser Anthony Fauci, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, DHS Disinformation Governance Board Director Nina Jankowicz, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and others. The administration “pressured and colluded” with social media giants Meta, Twitter and YouTube to censor information on various topics, including COVID-19, the lawsuit claims. It cites several instances of truthful information it said was censored by platforms and later verified as credible: the efficacy of masks, the Wuhan, China, lab leak story and the Hunter Biden laptop story. The federal government violated the First Amendment by colluding with platforms in the censorship, the lawsuit said: Officials “coerced, threatened, and pressured social-media platforms to censor disfavored speakers and viewpoints by using threats of adverse government action.” The White House didn’t comment.

The U.S. will establish new cryptographic standards for federal agencies to guard against quantum computing cybersecurity threats, President Joe Biden announced Wednesday through a national security memorandum and executive order. The National Institute of Standards and Technology will work with the Office of Management and Budget, the national cyber director, the National Security Agency and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to establish requirements for “inventorying all currently deployed cryptographic systems, excluding National Security Systems.” Agencies will need to establish “comprehensive plans” to protect U.S. intellectual property, R&D and other “sensitive technology from acquisition by America’s adversaries,” the White House said. The initiatives lay the groundwork for continued American leadership, the White House said: “America must start the lengthy process of updating our IT infrastructure today to protect against this quantum computing threat tomorrow.”

Congress should reject bipartisan legislation that would authorize the Library of Congress to designate mandatory technical measures for online platforms combating piracy (see 2203180069), advocates said Monday. Mozilla, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Fight for the Future, Creative Commons, Freedom of the Press Foundation and others signed a letter from about 3,000 creators accompanied by 6,300 petition signatures. The Strengthening Measures to Advance Rights Technologies (Smart) Copyright Act (S-3880) would result in automated censorship and surveillance back doors for ISPs and storage services like Dropbox, they said.

FCC regulations don’t allow the agency to interfere with Elon Musk’s buy of Twitter, a deal that could enhance competition and free speech (see 2204290074), Commissioner Nathan Simington said Monday. Simington rejected calls for the agency to block Musk, saying the agency’s competition review authority doesn’t extend to internet platforms like Twitter. Even if the agency had jurisdiction, “it would be inappropriate and contrary to the public interest to block,” he said: The deal doesn’t raise “any concerns about vertical or horizontal concentration in the social media market.” He dismissed concerns about concentration of ownership, pointing to ownership at Google, YouTube, Facebook, The Washington Post and The New York Times. The deal could help buck trends toward “curated and managed speech informed by the sensibilities of a narrow and unrepresentative class of insiders” and bring more diversity to social media, he said. It would be blatantly illegal for the government to try to stop Musk’s free expression approach, he said: “The law in this country does not recognize a government interest in restricting the open exchange of ideas.”

The Connecticut House passed privacy legislation 144-5 Thursday, sending it to Gov. Ned Lamont (D) for his signature. The Senate unanimously passed a concurring bill earlier this month (see 2204210011). SB-6 creates a “consumer bill of rights with respect to data privacy,” said House General Law Committee Chair Michael D’Agostino (D), lead sponsor in the House. Consumers would have the right to know when their data is being tracked, how it’s being used and to delete the data under the new opt-out measure. The House declined to consider an amendment on children’s privacy.

The U.S. joined more than 60 countries in a shared commitment to an open, inclusive, interoperable internet that respects basic human rights, they said Thursday. The Declaration for the Future of the Internet is a response to “rising digital authoritarianism” in countries like Russia and China, White House officials said during a press call Wednesday, citing repression of freedom of expression, news censorship, election interference and disinformation. The EU, Ukraine, Japan, Canada, New Zealand and Australia were among those endorsing the declaration. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo praised the declaration and applauded President Joe Biden’s goal of connecting “every single American to high-speed internet.” The declaration is “a timely opportunity to recommit to a shared vision of the global Internet as an open platform for opportunity, innovation, and understanding,” said NTIA Administrator Alan Davidson. Computer and Communications Industry Association President Matt Schruers said “a collaborative approach among like-minded democratic countries is needed to combat growing government threats to the open Internet,” and the tech sector is ready for partnership. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation raised concerns about opening the door for the EU to export its “innovation-limiting policy regime.” The declaration “should be scaled back considerably to address what are principally cross-border issues, such as cybersecurity, cross-border data flows and data localization,” as well as a commitment to trustworthy infrastructure and nondiscrimination, said Senior Policy Analyst Ashley Johnson.

If the D.C. Superior Court doesn’t reconsider dismissing an antitrust complaint against Amazon, it risks jeopardizing antitrust enforcement in the district, DOJ argued Wednesday in 2021 CA 001775 B (see 2204140051). D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine (D) sued Amazon, claiming that through its significant market power, it set agreements with merchants that artificially inflate prices on the platform. Judge Hiram Puig-Lugo orally dismissed Racine’s complaint at a hearing last month. The dismissal focused on irrelevant details, DOJ argued, saying the “only question for the Court to resolve at the motion-to-dismiss stage is whether the District has sufficiently alleged the agreements are unreasonable, and the Court’s analysis should properly focus on this inquiry.”

Congress should reject antitrust bills gaining momentum that would have economy-wide harms, a dozen tech and industry groups wrote Wednesday. Signers included the Computer and Communications Industry Association, CTA, TechNet, U.S. Hispanic Business Council, NetChoice, Software & Information Industry Association and Americans for Prosperity. They cited the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (S. 2992/HR-3816), Ending Platform Monopolies Act (HR-3825) and the Platform Competition and Opportunity Act (HR-3826). They noted a study from the National Economic Research Associates saying those bills would “cost the U.S. economy up to $319 billion” due to higher retail costs and loss of “valued services.” The bills have “no quantifiable benefits” for consumers or small businesses, they said, quoting the study. Analysis shows the use of “simplistic language that relies on market capitalization means that more American companies would be captured in just a few years: 13 additional companies in the next 5 to 10 years and likely over 100 companies by the 2030s.”

A man convicted of child exploitation had no right to privacy when the government seized his Facebook and Yahoo messaging data in the case, a 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Wednesday in 20-50052. The panel rejected an argument from defendant Carsten Igor Rosenow that the Stored Communications Act and the Protect Our Children Act transformed the platform searches into government action. It also rejected his argument that government involvement in the platforms’ searches triggered a Fourth Amendment violation. Rosenow consented to the platforms “honoring preservation requests from law enforcement under” their terms of use, the court said. Judge Danielle Forrest filed the opinion with Judge Consuelo Callahan. Judge Susan Graber dissented, questioning whether Yahoo acted as a government instrument or agent. Yahoo’s motivation to conduct the searches was “intertwined with, and dependent on, the government’s enforcement of criminal laws,” she wrote. Rosenow was arrested after returning from a sex tourism trip involving minors in the Philippines.

Twitter’s board members should preserve all records related to Elon Musk’s offer to buy Twitter (see 2204210038), House Judiciary Committee Republicans wrote the company Friday. This includes Twitter’s response to the offer and its evaluation of shareholder interests, the letter said. Online free speech is under attack from Big Tech, they wrote: Twitter’s decisions will be “consequential for public discourse” and “could give rise to renewed efforts to legislate in furtherance of preserving free expression online.” The company declined comment.