Twitter's own lawyers refute Elon Musk's claim that the 'Twitter Files' exposed US government censorship

For months, Twitter owner Elon Musk and his allies have amplified baseless claims that the US government illegally coerced Twitter into censoring a 2020 New York Post article about Hunter Biden. The foundation for those claims rests on the so-called "Twitter Files," a series of reports by a set of handpicked journalists who, at Musk's discretion, were given selective access to historical company archives.

Now, though, Twitter's own lawyers are disputing those claims in a case involving former President Donald Trump - forcefully rejecting any suggestion that the Twitter Files show what Musk and many Republicans assert they contain.

In a court filing last week, Twitter's attorneys contested one of the most central allegations to emerge from the Twitter Files: that regular communications between the FBI and Twitter ahead of the 2020 election amounted to government coercion to censor content or, worse, that Twitter had become an actual arm of the US government.

In tweets last year, Musk alleged that the communications showed a clear breach of the US constitution.

"If this isn't a violation of the Constitution's First Amendment, what is?" he said of a screenshot purportedly showing Joe Biden's presidential campaign in 2020 asking Twitter to review several tweets it suggested were violations of the company's terms. Some of the tweets in question included nonconsensual nude images that violated Twitter's policies.

In another push to promote misleading allegations of government malfeasance stemming from the Twitter Files, Musk also claimed that the "government paid Twitter millions of dollars to censor info from the public."

Legal experts have said the claim of a constitutional violation is weak because the First Amendment binds the government, not political campaigns, and Trump was president at the time, not Biden. The Twitter Files also show the Trump administration made its own requests for removal of Twitter content. And the payments to Twitter have also been identified as routine reimbursements for responding to subpoenas and investigations, not payments for content moderation decisions.