Basic information			Substance of the ruling			Accessibility of the case and further relevant links
Date	Name of the case (or case number)	The body delivering the decision	Keywords, topic	Executive part	Brief summary	Full text	Page at the website of the issuing court	Page in other databases	Unofficial materials, press communications
June 26. 2024.	MURTHY, SURGEON GENERAL, ET AL. v. MISSOURI, No. 23–411. Argued March 18, 2024—Decided June 26, 2024	Supreme Court of the United States of America	Freedom of expression	The Supreme Court of the United States of America held that the government might legitimately consult with social media platforms from their content moderation policy without making undue pressure on the management of these platforms to remove or not to remove certain opinions from the online marketplace of ideas.	Five individuals challenged the governmental efforts to prevent Covid-19-related misinformation through a series of consultations with the major social media platforms from their content moderation policies. The lower courts upheld the claims and considered that the government should not communicate with these platforms from their policies to avoid the elaboration of indirect cenzorship. The Supreme Court of the United States of America disagreed with the lower courts and confirmed the ability of the government to consult with the management of social media platforms from their content moderation policies especially during emergencies to effectively combat the spread of misinformation. Any claim against such consultations should prove that the removal of certain speech from the online sphere was resulted by the governmental interference. However, in the present case, this causal link could not be clearly established, therefore, the lower court judgments were revised, and the claims were rejected.	https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411_3dq3.pdf			https://www.npr.org/2024/06/26/nx-s1-5003970/supreme-court-social-media-case
June 24. 2024.		Supreme Court of the United States of America	Vaccination; freedom of religion; children's rights	The Supreme Court of the United States of America rejected three complaints against mandatory vaccination of children and against the lack of exemptions based on religious belief.	Three anti-vaccination groups founded by an independent presidential candidate challenged the mandatory Covid-19 vaccination ordered for school children, and also the lack of any exemption based on religious belief under the scope of this measure with general applicability. The Supreme Court of the United States of America upheld the lower court judgement and rejected the three complaints without hearing the merits.				https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/06/24/anti-vaccine-group-rfk-jr-supreme-court-covid/74194593007/