Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
The Supreme Court got it wrong – and has failed to uphold its responsibility to the Constitution by finding no standing in Murthy v. Missouri. My case of Kennedy v. Biden will proceed in the trial court where there is no question that @ChildrensHD and I have standing. Justice…
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) June 26, 2024
Today’s disappointing Supreme Court decision in Murthy v. Missouri, holding that the various states were not harmed by government and Big Tech censorship, is a wake up call to all Americans.
Even with “conservative” judges like Amy Coney Barrett, we can’t expect any help from…
— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) June 26, 2024
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Biden admin’s power to influence Big Tech oligarchs.
They’ve given platforms like Facebook, coerced by the Deep State, the power to decide what speech is “acceptable” instead of protecting the free exchange of ideas.
A very dangerous… pic.twitter.com/lH9qsqbiOu
— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) June 26, 2024
Matt Gaetz is talking like he’s ready for a revolution.
If the Supreme Court is going to throw out the First Amendment and say that the government has a right to tell private companies what they are allowed to publish, how are you going to do mental gymnastics to the point where you can claim that the US government is legitimate?
The US supreme court has struck down a lower court ruling in the case of Murthy v Missouri, in a decision that did not find the government’s communications with social media platforms about Covid-19 misinformation violated the first amendment. The court’s decision permits the government to call on tech companies to remove falsehoods, a key concern as misinformation spreads around this year’s presidential election.
Well, the government doesn’t have a right to remove “falsehoods.” That is absurd.
But this ruling also claims that the government has the ability to determine what is and is not a falsehood, which is totally unbelievable.
The court ruled 6-3 that the plaintiffs had no standing to bring the case against the Biden administration, with conservative justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissenting. Although many of the arguments in the case centered around how governments and platforms interact with free speech online, the ruling focused more on procedural issues and a lack of legal grounds to bring the case.
“The plaintiffs, without any concrete link between their injuries and the defendants’ conduct, ask us to conduct a review of the years-long communications between dozens of federal officials, across different agencies, with different social-media platforms, about different topics,” conservative justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote. “This court’s standing doctrine prevents us from ‘exercis[ing such] general legal oversight’ of the other branches of government” .
…
During oral arguments, the government contended that calling on social media platforms to take stronger measures against misinformation did not amount to threats and never implied legal consequences. Public health experts and state officials had warned that blocking the government from flagging medical misinformation or election falsehoods could cause serious societal harm.
It’s a cop-out on a technicality.
But everyone knows this was not about a technicality. The case was about the government engaging in direct censorship, something which is probably the single most illegal thing the government can do.
But hey – at least they refused to refer to Twitter as “X.”
Gotta give them credit for that.
