Anti-free speech leftists continue to fight tooth and nail for the Biden administration to censor Americans.
Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia attorneys general wrote an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme to overturn a preliminary injunction ruling that prevents the Biden administration from colluding with social media platforms to censor online content. The amicus brief argued that the ruling allegedly “failed to properly distinguish between impermissible coercion and permissible efforts to persuade.” But, the Fifth Circuit did indeed make those distinctions. The Democrat attorneys general just don’t agree with them.
In the July 4 ruling for Missouri v. Biden (renamed Murthy v. Missouri), the Fifth Circuit court ruled that the Biden administration could no longer “engag[e] in any communication of any kind” with Big Tech companies for the purpose of “urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”
The ruling, however, did not prohibit the administration from notifying social media companies of “criminal activity or criminal conspiracies,” “national security threats,” “threats to public safety,” information “intending to mislead voters about voting requirements and procedures,” “cyber-attacks against election infrastructure, or foreign attempts to influence elections.” Essentially, so long as the administration was not working to curtail legal speech, it could communicate with a social media platform.
The 23 attorneys general petitioning the Supreme Court to overturn the ruling admitted that one of the reasons why they wanted the ruling overturned was because states are engaging in the same kind of collusion to censor users. “Many Amici States have productively engaged in such communication and information-sharing with social-media platforms to address the proliferation of potentially harmful content—ranging from extremist videos to viral challenges encouraging users to engage in dangerous and potentially criminal activities,” the amicus brief reads, ignoring the fact that none of those types of communications were banned by the Fifth Circut ruling.
The injunction itself is not yet in effect as it was appealed twice including up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has placed it on a temporary hold.
Attorneys Generals of Arizona, Colorado, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia each signed the amicus brief.
Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.
