Murthy v. Missouri
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Murthy v. Missouri and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Murthy v. Missouri.
In Murthy v. Missouri, the Supreme Court addressed whether plaintiffs had Article III standing to seek an injunction against government officials allegedly pressuring social media platforms to suppress speech. The Court found that neither the individual nor state plaintiffs demonstrated a substantial risk of future harm traceable to the government defendants. Consequently, the Court reversed the Fifth Circuit's decision.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Murthy v. Missouri.
The Court held that neither the individual nor the state plaintiffs have established Article III standing to seek an injunction against any defendant.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Murthy v. Missouri. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Standing is relevant to Murthy v. Missouri
The Court's decision primarily revolves around whether the plaintiffs have Article III standing to seek an injunction.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Held: Neither the individual nor the state plaintiffs have established Article III standing to seek an injunction against any defendant.
-
Why Free Speech is relevant to Murthy v. Missouri
The case involves allegations that the government pressured platforms to suppress speech, implicating First Amendment concerns.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Respondents...alleging that the Government pressured the platforms to censor their speech in violation of the First Amendment.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Murthy v. Missouri
The Court reviews the actions of government officials and agencies in relation to constitutional limits.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)A proper case or controversy exists only when at least one plaintiff 'establish[es] that [she] ha[s] standing to sue,' ibid.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Murthy v. Missouri that support the summary and concepts above.
The plaintiffs' theories of standing depend on the platforms' actions.
The plaintiffs must show a substantial risk that, in the near future, at least one platform will restrict the speech of at least one plaintiff.
The Court has recognized a 'First Amendment right to receive information and ideas.'
