>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
When Fox News sought a comment from the administration, a spokesperson defended their actions, claiming, “When confronted with a deadly pandemic, this administration encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety. Our position has been clear and consistent: we believe tech companies and other private actors should take into account the effects their actions have on the American people, while making independent choices about the information they present.”
This statement underscores the administration’s belief that the First Amendment is an obstacle to their objectives, and that external entities like Meta should work around it. The spokesperson’s remarks also imply that Zuckerberg’s decision to reveal these pressures was seen as a betrayal by the administration, further complicating the relationship between Big Tech and government.
The implications of this revelation are far-reaching. The Gateway Pundit, a news outlet that has been directly impacted by Big Tech’s censorship, is one of the plaintiffs in a landmark free speech case, Murthy v. Missouri. This case, which also involves the states of Missouri and Louisiana, alleges that the Biden administration, along with numerous federal officials and agencies, conspired with social media companies like Facebook and Twitter to suppress the speech of millions of Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 Presidential Election.
The case has made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the justices have been asked to address several critical issues: whether the plaintiffs have the legal standing to sue, whether the government’s actions amounted to violations of the First Amendment, and whether a trial court’s injunction to stop the government from suppressing speech during the case was appropriate.
The evidence presented in the case strongly suggests that the FBI pressured Facebook to take down the Hunter Biden laptop story, a clear example of government overreach into free speech. Despite this, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, ruled that the Biden-Harris administration’s policy of deleting, suppressing, and deplatforming certain people and ideas is immune from legal challenge, effectively leaving no avenue for redress.
Carry 46 rounds concealed? (comfortably)
In the aftermath of the ruling, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey vowed to continue the fight by seeking additional evidence in district court. However, the ruling has left many Americans concerned about the future of free speech in the country.
The only sure way to end this censorship regime and restore true democracy is by electing leaders who respect the First Amendment. The possibility of another Harris administration raises fears that Big Tech will continue to be pressured into censoring ordinary Americans, with further efforts to silence conservative voices and potentially drive them out of business altogether. As the 2024 election looms, the stakes for free speech and democracy have never been higher.
