US officials are worried about a federal court order that could have a ‘chilling effect’ on efforts to combat election disinformation, a senior official said.

The Biden administration’s appeal of a federal judge’s order blocking it from communicating with social media companies about election-related disinformation has been temporarily blocked by a federal appeals court. The order, which was issued last week, has been portrayed as a fight over free speech on the internet amid allegations of government censorship. But security experts, academics and current and former US officials worry that their own good faith-efforts to protect elections could end up in a future lawsuit, according to interviews with more than half a dozen sources. As the case slowly works its way through the courts, however, there are early signs that the order may have a “chilling effect” on how the federal government and states address election-related disinformation just as the 2024 election cycle gets underway, according to interviews with more than half a dozen sources. Last week’s court order by a district judge in Louisiana blocking several federal agencies from communicating with social platforms about certain content has been portrayed as a fight over free speech on the internet amid allegations of government censorship. And on Friday, the order was temporarily blocked from taking effect by a federal appeals court. As the Biden administration’s appeal slowly works its way through the courts, however, security experts, academics and current and former US officials worry that their own good faith-efforts to protect elections could end up in a future lawsuit, according to interviews Chris Krebs, former head of the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) “There will absolutely be a chilling effect at least when you consider that you’ll probably have a more conservative approach to engagements [between federal officials and tech platforms] that are otherwise completely appropriate and on solid legal footing with or without the injunction,” said Chris Krebs, who served as the agency’s director until January of this year. He added: “Everything that CISA can do in election security survives the injunction.” Still, the new uncertainty from the order may only add to a growing list of concerning factors ahead of the 2024 election_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________The impacteltefaction of the first sentence of this article is that the Supreme Court will hear the N/(#£[2-3/|armeéribunluieli«fecțifreienémifreienndernigte Durchschnittfreien­schirmfreiengehtschickenfreienfreienanspruchfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreienfreien