by Streiff at RedState
The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in a potentially groundbreaking case concerning the ability of the federal government to coerce social media platforms into banning opinions and users who disagreed with a government policy. The case is called Murthy v. Missouri, formerly known as Biden v. Missouri.
____________________________
BACKGROUND:
Free Speech Wins: 5th Circuit Upholds Heart of Injunction Against Biden Administration
Victory for Free Speech: Federal Judge’s Ruling Places Government Censorship in the Crosshairs
Court Denies Motion to Dismiss Censorship Case Against Fauci and Other Biden Official
FBI and White House Slapped Down By Judge in Major Censorship Case
The court seemed skeptical of the arguments proffered by Missouri and Louisiana.
A majority of Supreme Court justices on Monday appeared highly skeptical about claims the Biden administration crossed the line from persuasion to coercion when it told social media platforms to remove problematic content.
At issue is an injunction imposed by a federal judge, currently on hold, that would limit contacts between government officials and social media companies on a wide range of issues.
During oral arguments, justices across the ideological spectrum questioned whether the conduct of government officials was unlawful and whether plaintiffs that brought the lawsuit could even show they were directly harmed. Among the issues raised was the lack of evidence that government officials threatened punitive action if the social media companies failed to cooperate.
While I think the justices were way too deferential to what we all know was going on…
Continue Reading