Elon Musk’s Supreme Court endgame in defamation lawsuit.
Late last year, Elon Musk sued nonprofit media watchdog Media Matters for America for defamation. That complaint, filed Nov. 20, alleges that an article by Media Matters showing that X had paired high-profile company ads with pro-Nazi content was somehow contrived, false. By suing, Musk aims to deter Media Matters and other organizations not just from publicizing X’s advertising practices but from fighting disinformation generally. Musk’s suit against Media Matters presents a genuine threat—to the watchdog, of course, but also to the First Amendment itself.
In legal parlance, Musk’s suit against MMFA is a textbook SLAPP suit—an intimidation lawsuit, brought not on merits but as a way to coerce critics into backing down by crushing them with frivolous and expensive civil litigation. Such suits are prohibited in many states for their chilling effects on speech. But there is no overarching federal anti-SLAPP law and no consensus among courts when it comes to applying individual states’ anti-SLAPP laws.
X filed its suit against Media Matters in a federal court friendly to right-wing ideologues and their political plays. The choice of venue is telling: X is based in Nevada, but MMFA is based in Washington—and the reporter who wrote the MMFA report, also named in the complaint, is based in Maryland. And Musk filed suit in the Northern District of Texas. Although changes announced this month by the federal judiciary may prevent such venue shopping in the future, X successfully bid for, and received, assignment of its case to a politically sympathetic judge.
AdvertisementJudge Reed O’Connor is notorious for his 2018 ruling attempting to overturn the Affordable Care Act, a decision tossed by the Supreme Court because O’Connor didn’t have jurisdiction to begin with. He was likewise overruled by that court after ruling that members of the military could defy orders surrounding COVID vaccination, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh writing that O’Connor had wrongly inserted himself “into the Navy’s chain of command.”
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementThe home-court advantages don’t end there. Texas, along with Louisiana and Mississippi, falls under the jurisdiction of the far-right U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5thCircuit, which has barred the application of Texas’ anti-SLAPP law in federal court. Of its 17 active judges, 12 are Republican appointees—and six of those 12 are Trump appointees.
AdvertisementTexas, to which Musk has relocated and is attempting to move as many of his business ventures as possible, has rolled out the red carpet for X Corporation. The day X filed its complaint, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced a complementary fraud investigation into Media Matters. No wonder: X has hired three former Paxton lieutenants to handle the Media Matters case. Judd Stone II is the former state solicitor general, a former law clerk of Justice Antonin Scalia, and a former chief counsel for Sen. Ted Cruz.
In going after Media Matters, X means to weaponize the First Amendment against its critics. Musk has long reveled in alleging liberal-led censorship, even as he censors liberal accounts. Shortly after taking over Twitter, Musk gutted its content moderation infrastructure. He staged a circus by releasing pre-acquisition internal files and claiming that the U.S. government conspired to censor conservatives and, inter alia, cover up the crimes of Hunter Biden. It was all a conspiracy, he said, against “free speech.”
Advertisement AdvertisementEven in Texas, Musk’s suit would founder before an impartial judge. X’s complaint blames Media Matters for advertisers—among them Apple, Comcast, NBC Universal, and IBM—ending relationships with X Corporation. Musk’s legal manipulations and bombastic attacks on the organization make clear that his intent is to punish Media Matters, driving up legal fees, and deter other journalists from reporting on X.
Even if the Northern District of Texas did have jurisdiction, that court should not find any merit in X’s suit. Whether unable to rebut the Media Matters report or unwilling to settle for citing facts in X’s favor, if any exist, the X complaint instead advances claims almost certain to be proved false.
Advertisement AdvertisementRelated From Slate
Nitish Pahwa
The Don Lemon Interview Accomplished One Thing
Read MoreX asserts that Media Matters “manufactured” white-nationalist content juxtaposed with advertisements and fraudulently portrayed it as X’s doing. Yet, critically, X’s complaint does not deny the heart of Media Matters’ assertion: Users on X couldsee top advertisers’ content next to hate speech. That’s a major problem for X: In defamation cases, the truth is an absolute defense in every federal court of appeals in the country save one. (The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1stCircuit alone has held that deploying truth maliciously may still be defamatory.)
Advertisement AdvertisementX also fails to effectively allege malice. According to X’s legal team, it was just Media Matters, as a result of its “manipulation” of X’s algorithms—and, at most, one other X user, the complaint notes in a throwaway aside—that arrived at pairings of ads with racist, antisemitic, and other white nationalist content. The organization should instead have reported, X claims, on “real users” and “the actual,organic production of content and advertisement pairings.” The claim amounts to arguing that by using X the way a “real” user might, just more efficiently and at scale, and by failing to conform to X’s preferences and parrot its representations—that is, by reporting—Media Matters acted maliciously.
AdvertisementPopular in News & Politics
- The Lawyer Defending Idaho’s Abortion Ban Irritated the One Justice He Needed on His Side
- We’ve Been Entertaining an Illusion About the Supreme Court. It’s Finally Been Shattered.
- You Don’t Want to Know How It’s Going Between Trump’s Lawyers and the Judge Presiding Over His Criminal Case
- Prosecutors Are Finally Revealing Their Strategy Against Trump
In X and Musk’s version of reality, they are the arbiters and defenders of free speech. Their media strategy—threatening reporters and critics, following with legal action—buttresses that narrative. It’s all part of a more ambitious agenda. The suit should fail, but if ever there were a federal court where it might succeed, it’s the Northern District of Texas. Likewise, the 5thCircuit has proved to be a hyperpartisan venue, the most likely of all appellate courts to allow Musk’s SLAPP suit to proceed. If that’s what happens, corporate titans and right-wing blowhards will be emboldened to weaponize “free speech” against critics, eroding actual freedom of speech.
X’s gambit against Media Matters must be recognized as the cynical trick it is. Musk’s endgame is getting to the Supreme Court. There, X could fight to push First Amendment jurisprudence further rightward, aiding both corporations averse to critique and purveyors of disinformation, giving them new paths to avoiding accountability and retaliating against journalists and watchdogs. For these reasons, among many others, X’s Texas suit against D.C.’s Media Matters poses a profound threat to journalism, the Constitution, and democracy nationwide.
Tweet Share Share Comment(责任编辑:产品中心)
- Pope says England are not 'one
- Kamala Harris reminding Mike Pence 'I'm speaking' is every woman in a meeting
- Every iPhone release to date, in photos [PHOTO GALLERY]
- Poston completes wire
- New Grok response directs users to Vote.gov for election questions
- 全国土壤普查办抽验组到广东开展土壤普查质量抽验
- Mother seeks helping hand to wake up sleepy child
- Twitter has raised a Pope meme from the dead
- 'The Beatles: Get Back' review: Eight hours of bliss for every Beatles fan
- 雅安市举办首届“文轩教育”校园足球精英夏令营
- Candidate registration begins for June 1 local elections, parliamentary by
- Jaime Harrison brought a plexiglass divider to debate Lindsey Graham
- Sir David Attenborough breaks Jennifer Aniston’s Instagram record
-
How do you make safe, cheap nuclear reactors? Bury them a mile deep
Startup Deep Fission has come up with a new way to deal with the economic and safety problems of nuc ...[详细] -
多地推进赋权强镇和强镇赋权 | 市委书记抓乡村振兴2024.03.25-03.31)_南方+_南方plus本文收录于专辑上周,多地召开机构改革工作会议。珠海市强调,优化镇街机构设置和管理体制,推动资源 ...[详细]
-
White eyes Euros to cap glorious career
MANCHESTER:Ellen White has experienced the elation and heartbreak of international football more tha ...[详细] -
Reviews of 'House of Gucci' are mixed, but agree Lady Gaga's performance is huge
The reviews for House of Guccihave finally come in, and they appear almost as conflicted as the Gucc ...[详细] -
Alcaraz, Sinner survive US Open wobbles
NEW YORK:Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz survived US Open first round wobbles on Tuesday to stay on ...[详细] -
England expects as Euro 2022 nears
MANCHESTER:England will play host to the women's European Championship over the next month with ...[详细] -
S. Korean embassy officials return to Kyiv: ministry
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy gives a virtual speech to the National Assembly in Seoul on ...[详细] -
Essential workers who pay more taxes than Trump are tweeting their anger
Did you ever imagine you'd be paying more in federal income taxes than President Donald Trump?You mi ...[详细] -
I got a chance to play around with the Pixel 9 Pro XL, and man, it looks like we have to completely ...[详细]
-
Apple unveils iPhone 12 and iPhone 12 mini with 5G support
It's real and it's here: Apple finally announced the iPhone 12.The next in the ultra popular smartph ...[详细]
Best smartphone deal: Google Pixel 8a on sale for $449 at Amazon
S. Korea, US conduct 1st joint short
- Best smartphone deal: Google Pixel 8a on sale for $449 at Amazon
- S. Korea urges N. Korea to stop escalating tensions over Kim's pledge to bolster nuclear power
- Transition team denies claims Yoon's wife offended FM's wife
- 雅安动植物基因库之斑背潜鸭
- Trump trials: Jack Smith is reportedly reconsidering his strategy.
- 多地推进赋权强镇和强镇赋权
- 雅安动植物基因库之反嘴鹬