Media Matters President and CEO Angelo Carusone issued the following statement after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia unanimously upheld the district court’s decision last year to block Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s civil investigative demand of Media Matters on First Amendment grounds.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rules in Media Matters’ favor on First Amendment grounds: Angelo Carusone statement
Written by Media Matters Staff
Published
“Elon Musk encouraged Republican state attorneys general to use their power to harass their critics and stifle reporting about X. Ken Paxton was one of those AGs who took up the call, and his attempt to use his office as an instrument for Musk’s censorship crusade has been defeated. Today's decision is a victory for free speech.
“We are also buoyed that yet another court has seen through the fog of Musk’s ‘thermonuclear’ legal onslaught and recognized it for the meritless attack to silence a critic that it is."
Key takeaways from the ruling:
- The judges ruled that “Media Matters is the target of a government campaign of retaliation” for exercising First Amendment rights, which “reflects concrete and present harm. And as the target of an arguably bad-faith investigation, Appellees are also experiencing special burdens on their newsgathering activities and operation of their media company.”
- “In addition, Paxton’s contention that Appellees’ conduct is not constitutionally protected because their articles were deliberately designed to mislead consumers about X is meritless. The record is utterly devoid of evidence to support such a claim.”
- “As to the first element, Appellees – a media organization and news reporter – are obviously engaged in conduct protected under the First Amendment. Indeed, the underlying incident that precipitated their claim involved their news reporting on a public figure and alleged political extremism on a popular social media platform. Their reporting on public issues are quintessential First Amendment activities."
The same day that X Corp. filed a meritless lawsuit against Media Matters for America for an accurate report on the platform’s extremism, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton opened a similarly specious investigation into Media Matters under Texas’ Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Paxton subsequently issued an overbroad and invasive civil investigative demand – even though Media Matters has no relevant connection to Texas. The law firm Stone Hilton, led by former Paxton deputies Judd Stone and Chris Hilton, is representing X Corp. in its case against Media Matters. In April of 2024, Judge Amit Mehta of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted Media Matters a preliminary injunction against Paxton.
In April 2025, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California ruled that “it seems almost certain that the X entities’ decision to file multiple suits in multiple jurisdictions is designed more to bully Media Matters and inflict financial hardship upon it than to actually vindicate those entities’ rights.”
The nonpartisan U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, which catalogs press freedom violations in the United States, recently added an incident report related to the Texas attorney general's investigation to its database.