The Supreme Court of the United States overturned a lower court’s order, properly green-lighting the Biden government’s ability to carry out such activities during the 2024 election.
The plaintiffs may identify standing by demonstrating a significant risk that they will suffer a harm that can be attributed to a government defendant and that the plaintiffs can recover through the injunction they want. Because no claimant has carried that problem, none has status to get a primary order”, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the judge’s majority.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson signed onto Barrett’s mind. Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch joined the minority in drafting the opposition.
Filed by Missouri and Louisiana, the petition before the great court alleged that the federal government ‘s , collusion , with Big Tech companies to reduce Americans ‘ website talk violates the First Amendment. The Biden administration reorganized with social media giant to judge posts that they deemed objectionable, even if the posts contained objectively accurate information shortly after taking office in January 2021.
According to found contact records, the management specifically targeted articles containing claims and facts about authorities Covid policies.
U. S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty ultimately agreed with the plaintiffs ‘ arguments,  , issuing , a preliminary injunction on July 4, 2023, that barred federal agencies from colluding with Big Tech to censor posts they do n’t like. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals , upheld , Doughty’s lawsuit in September. The court later issued a correct ruling that also prevented CISA from colluding with Big Tech to stop free speech online, despite the initial ruling not including the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency ( CISA ).
The U. S. Supreme Court, but,  , lifted , the 5th Circuit’s order in October, essentially allowing the federal government ‘s , repression operations , to begin while it considered the merits of the case.
The FBI confirmed to The Federalist next month that it had resumed collaborating with social media platforms to delete comments it says are “disinformation” ahead of the 2024 election. When just questioned on the subject, neither CISA nor the State Department had affirm to The Federalist whether they had resumed for communications with Big Tech.
In her majority opinion, Barrett claimed that” ]a ] t this stage” of litigation, plaintiffs have not “established standing to seek an injunction” against the named federal agencies and that as such, the Supreme Court “lack]s ] jurisdiction to reach the merits of the dispute”.
” The plaintiffs, without any practical link between their injuries and the defendants ‘ conduct, ask us to conduct a review of the years- much communications between dozens of governmental officials, across various agencies, with various social- media platforms, about different topics”, Barrett wrote. ” This Court’s standing doctrine prevents us from’ exercis]ing such ] general legal oversight’ of the other branches of Government. We therefore invert the Fifth Circuit’s decision and trial the case for further proceedings in accordance with this viewpoint.
In his dissention, Alito noted that” [w]h the officers did in this case was more gentle than the ham-handed censorship found to be illegal” in a previous case before the court, but that the government ‘ censorship antics documented in Murthy v. Missouri are” no less coercive.” In fact, the associate justice highlighted how the Biden administration’s efforts were “even more dangerous” due to the high- level government officials involved.
” It was blatantly unconstitutional, and the country may come to regret the Court’s failure to say so”, Alito wrote. ” The message will be read by officials who read today’s decision together with Vullo.” If a coercive campaign is carried out with enough sophistication, it may get by. This Court should not send that message.
The high court’s Wednesday ruling has major implications for the upcoming 2024 election.
For instance, CISA stepped up its censorship efforts in the weeks leading up to the 2020 election by flagging posts for Big Tech companies that it claimed were deserving of being censored, some of which called into question the security of voting practices like mass, unsupervised mail-in voting. This was done despite CISA , privately acknowledging , the risks associated with such practices.
The FBI also took on a censorship role during the 2020 election, in what has been characterized as a clear attempt to help Joe Biden’s election prospects. In the months leading up to the November contest, the agency— which had , authenticated , Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop as early as November 2019— was issuing warnings to then- Twitter and Facebook to be on the lookout for so- called” Russian propaganda” and “hack- and- leak operations” by” state actors”.
After the New York Post dropped its , bombshell story , on the laptop weeks before the 2020 contest, both companies went out of their way to censor the story and prevent its reach.
On , Twitter, users were not permitted to share the story, even via direct message. Further, the website removed links and added warnings that it might be “unsafe.” Meanwhile, Facebook , announced , shortly after the story broke that it would be “reducing]the story’s ] distribution” pending verification by” third- party fact checking partners”.
Later, Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg later acknowledged in a podcast interview aired in 2022 Joe Rogan that the company’s decision to suppress the story was based on the FBI’s warning.
Under the Supreme Court’s recent ruling, such efforts are now permitted.
Shawn Fleetwood is a graduate of the University of Mary Washington and a staff writer for The Federalist. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClear Health, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
