Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-411_3dq3.pdf
Page Number: 67.0

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

33 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

some  requested  policy  changes.  But  the  interactions  re-
counted  above  unmistakably  show  that  the  White  House
was insistent that Facebook should do more than it was do-
ing on its own, see, e.g., supra, at 11–12, and Facebook re-
peatedly yielded—even if it did not always give the White 
House everything it wanted. 

Internal Facebook emails paint a clear picture of subser-
vience.  The platform quickly realized that its “handling of
[COVID]  misinformation”  was  “importan[t]”  to  the  White
House,  so  it  looked  for  ways  “to  be  viewed  as  a  trusted, 
transparent partner” and “avoid . . . public spat[s].”  Com-
mittee Report 181, 184, 188.  After the White House blamed 
Facebook for aiding an insurrection, the platform realized 
that it was at a “crossroads . . . with the White House.”  Id., 
at  294.  “Given  what  is  at  stake  here,”  one  Facebook  em-
ployee  proposed  reevaluating  the  company’s  “internal 
methods” to “see what further steps we may/may not be able 
to take.”  Id., at 295.  This reevaluation led to one of Face-
book’s policy changes.  See supra, at 8–10. 

Facebook  again  took  stock  of  its  relationship  with  the 
White  House  after  the  President’s  accusation  that  it  was 
“killing  people.”  Internally,  Facebook  saw  little  merit  in
many of the White House’s critiques.  One employee labeled 
the White House’s understanding of misinformation “com-
pletely  unclear”  and  speculated  that  “it’s  convenient  for 
them to blame us” “when the vaccination campaign isn’t go-
ing as hoped.”  Committee Report 473.  Nonetheless, Face-
book figured that its “current course” of “in effect explaining 
ourselves more fully, but not shifting on where we draw the 
lines,” is “a recipe for protracted and increasing acrimony
with the [White House].”  Id., at 573.  “Given the bigger fish 
we have to fry with the Administration,” such as the EU-
U. S.  dispute  over  “data  flows,”  that  did  not  “seem  like  a 
great  place”  for  Facebook-White  House  relations  “to  be.” 
Ibid.    So  the  platform  was  motivated  to  “explore  some
moves that we can make to show that we are trying to be