The JAWBONE Act prohibits federal agencies from coercing private speech platforms and AI systems into taking specific content actions, while also establishing a public portal for logging such government communications.
Ted Cruz
Senator
TX
The JAWBONE Act prohibits federal agencies from coercing private speech platforms, including AI systems, into taking specific content actions against protected speech. It establishes a federal cause of action allowing harmed parties to sue for violations of this prohibition. Furthermore, the Act mandates the creation of standards for logging government communications with these platforms and establishing a public portal to report these interactions.
JAWBONE Act Targets Government 'Pressure' on Social Media: New Lawsuits and Public Logs Coming in 2025
The JAWBONE Act aims to stop federal officials from leaning on tech companies to silence speech they don't like. By adding Section 723 to the Communications Act, the bill makes it illegal for any federal agency or employee to 'coerce' social media platforms, AI providers, or broadcasters into removing or altering content. Think of it as a legal firewall designed to prevent the government from doing an end-run around the First Amendment by using private companies as their personal censors. If a federal agent hints that a platform might face 'adverse consequences' unless a specific post is taken down, that official—and their agency—could now face a federal lawsuit.
The 'No-Pressure' Zone
This bill defines 'coercion' by looking at the vibes and the power dynamics of a conversation. It asks: Was the tone hostile? Did the official mention their regulatory power? Was there a clear disclaimer that the platform didn't actually have to comply? For a regular person—say, a local journalist whose post was flagged after a government email—this means a clear path to sue. Under Section 3, anyone 'harmed' by this government pressure can take the agency to court for damages and attorney fees. It’s not just about deleting posts, either; it covers 'content actions' like shadow-banning, changing recommendation algorithms, or even messing with AI-generated responses.
Receipts in the Public Square
To keep things transparent, the bill requires the government to keep a literal paper trail. Section 4 and 5 task NIST and the OSTP with building a public, searchable website where agencies must log their communications with tech companies every 120 days. If a federal employee emails a platform about 'content moderation standards,' that email’s metadata and a summary of the request have to go on the portal for everyone to see. There are exceptions for legit stuff—like warrants for criminal investigations or national security threats—but for general policy 'suggestions,' the government has to show its work.
The Cost of Doing Business
While this protects your feed from backroom government deals, it creates a massive new administrative hurdle for federal workers. Every email or meeting with a tech rep now carries the risk of a lawsuit or an ethics complaint. To manage this, the bill says the Department of Justice will defend employees and pay their legal bills—unless the employee acted in a 'willful and wanton' way. In those cases, the employee is on the hook to pay the government back. For the average person, this might mean a more open internet, but it could also mean the government becomes much slower to flag actual misinformation or harmful trends because they’re worried about getting sued for 'jawboning.'