Federal Court Rules Government Censorship of Animal Advocates’ Speech on Social Media is Unconstitutional

On July 30, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the National Institutes of Health (NIH)’s use of keyword blocking, which targets comments critical of animal testing, violates the First Amendment. Its decision comes in response to a lawsuit brought by the Animal Legal Defense Fund, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). 

The NIH blocked keywords critical of its role funding animal testing research from appearing in comments on its Facebook page and Instagram account. Through keyword blocking, the NIH automatically hid all comments containing words such as “torture,” “testing,” “animal,” “monkey,” and “primate.” Until this lawsuit was filed, the NIH also suppressed comments mentioning “PETA” or using the hashtag #stopanimaltesting. 

In today’s decision, the court concluded that it was unreasonable for the NIH to ban discussion of animal testing, when several of its own posts promoted animal testing. The court noted that the agency’s use of keyword blocking “skews sharply against the appellant’s viewpoint” and warned that government officials must “tread carefully when enforcing any speech restriction to ensure it is not viewpoint discriminatory and does not inappropriately censor criticism or exposure of government actions.” The ruling reverses a decision made by a district court and directs that court to issue a summary judgment victory on behalf of the plaintiffs. 

In addition to PETA, plaintiffs in the lawsuit include Madeline Krasno, a former animal research lab technician turned animal advocate, and Ryan Hartkopf, an engineer in the digital health field. They had comments hidden by the agency’s keyword-blocking practice on numerous occasions, making it far more difficult for them to communicate their message on these platforms, to raise public awareness of animal testing practices, and to hear the speech of others who want to discuss animal testing. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is also considering whether the use of keyword blocking to suppress criticism on social media violates the First Amendment. In that case, plaintiff Madeline Krasno is represented by the Animal Legal Defense Fund, and the Knight Institute and PETA submitted an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief explaining the rise in censorship on official social media accounts and arguing that prohibiting the use of keywords associated with disfavored perspectives is unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. Read more about that case from the Knight Institute.