DOJ Asks La. Judge to Delay Ruling on RFK Jr.’s Motion for Social Media Injunction
Though the July 24 consolidation of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s social media censorship lawsuit against the Biden administration with Missouri v. Biden doesn’t “deprive” the court of jurisdiction to rule on Kennedy’s motion for a preliminary injunction, adjudication of that motion before the U.S. Supreme Court resolves Missouri “would make little practical difference and would serve only to complicate proceedings,” said DOJ’s brief Wednesday (docket 3:23-cv-00381) in U.S. District Court for Western Louisiana in Monroe.
Days after SCOTUS denied Kennedy’s motion to intervene in Missouri, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty told the parties in Kennedy v. Biden he was now “inclined” to rule on the injunction motion but asked whether he has the jurisdiction to do so with the related case now before the Supreme Court (see 2312150026). Doughty’s July 24 decision consolidating the cases said a ruling on Kennedy’s request for an injunction would need to wait until after SCOTUS completes its review of the Missouri injunction to “keep the consolidation from complicating the matter on appeal.”
SCOTUS has already “stayed in full” the injunction in Missouri (see 2310230003), said DOJ’s brief. In so doing, SCOTUS “necessarily determined” that the government “made a strong showing” that the injunctive relief granted to the Missouri plaintiffs was “erroneous,” and that the equities and public interest “weigh against giving effect to the injunction pending appellate disposition,” it said.
Kennedy’s response to DOJ’s brief is due Dec. 27. He seeks the injunction to bar the government from censoring his protected speech on social media.
The “broad terms” of the injunction stayed in Missouri “overlap significantly” with the injunction sought by the Kennedy plaintiffs, said DOJ’s brief. “It would be inappropriate to issue an injunction that would at least partially reinstate the injunction that the Supreme Court has already stayed,” it said.
For that reason alone, Doughty should defer ruling on Kennedy’s pending motion until SCOTUS decides Missouri, said DOJ’s brief. At a minimum, the Supreme Court’s stay in Missouri requires Doughty “to immediately stay any injunction it might issue” in favor of the Kennedy plaintiffs, it said.
The “prudential considerations" that work in favor of holding the Kennedy plaintiffs’ motion in abeyance that Doughty acknowledged when granting their motion for consolidation in July “remain valid,” said DOJ’s brief. If anything, those considerations “have only become stronger over time,” it said.
It’s “beyond dispute” that any appellate disposition of the injunction in Missouri “would largely govern” the disposition of the injunction sought by the Kennedy plaintiffs, said DOJ’s brief. When seeking intervention before the Supreme Court in Missouri, the Kennedy plaintiffs acknowledged that the SCOTUS decision in Missouri would, for all intents and purposes, adjudicate their claims, it said. When consolidating the two actions, Doughty determined that they raise the same legal challenges on “substantially identical facts” against the same defendants as in Missouri, it said.
The government filed its opening brief in Missouri on Tuesday (see 2312200002), and the Missouri plaintiffs will respond by Feb. 2, said DOJ’s brief. Even if Doughty were to decide the Kennedy plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction immediately, there’s “no practical way” that his decision in Kennedy could be taken up in time for SCOTUS to consider that decision alongside Missouri, it said.
Issuance of the requested injunction in Kennedy would only waste “judicial and party resources,” said DOJ’s brief. It would require “largely duplicative appellate briefing and judicial determinations,” potentially on “a highly expedited emergency basis,” that likely would be overtaken by the Supreme Court’s decision in Missouri, it said.