“Despite the inflammatory nature of the plaintiffs’ accusations, their claims are rooted in their displeasure with defendants’ speech, not unlawful actions,” the brief stated. “The First Amendment gives the defendants the right to speak freely about matters of public concern, especially when it involves matters of national security.”
The Government’s Role in the Blocked Deal
The proposed sale was blocked after the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) raised alarms over potential risks to U.S. national security and the domestic steel industry. Biden’s decision was based on concerns that the merger could lead to a decrease in steel production in the U.S., which would negatively affect national supply chains.
According to the lawsuit, Cleveland-Cliffs and Goncalves used “false” statements and “anticompetitive tactics” to derail the merger, claiming that Cleveland-Cliffs was trying to monopolize the steel industry by weakening U.S. Steel’s position.
The Steelworkers Union Defends Its Campaign
The United Steelworkers union also came to the defense of Cleveland-Cliffs, saying its public campaign was solely intended to highlight national security risks tied to the proposed deal. In a statement, the union emphasized that its actions were a lawful exercise of its First Amendment rights to influence government policy.
