State of Missouri, et al. v. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., et al
CASE SUMMARY
Public statements, emails, and recent publicly released documents establish that the President of the United States and other senior officials in the Biden Administration violated the First Amendment by directing social-media companies to censor viewpoints that conflict with the government’s messaging on Covid-19.
NCLA joined the lawsuit, State of Missouri ex rel. Schmitt, et al. v. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., et al., representing renowned epidemiologists and co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, as well as Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines. Social media platforms, acting at the federal government’s behest, repeatedly censored NCLA’s clients for articulating views on those platforms in opposition to government-approved views on Covid-19 restrictions.
.@TuckerCarlson, @TomiLahren, @RealCandaceO, @RobertKennedyJr, @AlexBerenson, @gbdeclaration were all censored.
— kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 30, 2023
There are future censorship plans to censor topics like climate disinformation, abortion-relation speech, gendered disinformation, and racial justice. pic.twitter.com/aEJD4qN05t
This insidious censorship was the direct result of the federal government’s ongoing campaign to silence those who voice perspectives that deviate from those of the Biden Administration. Government officials’ public threats to punish social media companies that did not do their bidding demonstrate this linkage, as do emails from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to social media companies that only recently were made public.
Government-induced censorship is achieved through a wide variety of mechanisms, ranging from complete bans, temporary bans, “shadow bans” (where often neither the user nor his audience is notified of the suppression of speech), deboosting, de-platforming, de-monetizing, restricting access to content, requiring users to take down content, and imposing warning labels that require click-through to access content, among others. These methods also include temporary and permanent suspensions of disfavored speakers.
This sort of censorship, which strikes at the heart of what the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was designed to protect—free speech, especially political speech—constitutes unlawful government action. The federal government is deciding whose voices and ideas may be heard, and whose voices and ideas must be silenced. Moreover, this state action deprives Americans of their right to hear the views of those who are being silenced, a First Amendment corollary of the right to free speech. The government’s policy of coercing social-media companies to censor Plaintiffs’ viewpoints should be declared unlawful and halted immediately.
https://nclalegal.org/state-of-missouri-et-al-v-joseph-r-biden-jr-et-al/
Join the new civil liberties movement. Protect Americans from the Administrative State!
CASE START DATE: August 2, 2022
DECIDING COURT: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
ORIGINAL COURT: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
CASE DOCUMENTS
March 20, 2023 | Memorandum Ruling
March 15, 2023 | Memorandum Order
March 13, 2023 | Plaintiffs’ Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Proposed Findings of Fact
March 6, 2023 | Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction
January 11, 2022 | Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief Addressing the Fifth Circuit’s Nondispositive Order Regarding Jennifer Psaki’s Deposition
December 5, 2022 | Transcript of Zoom Videotaped Deposition of Daniel Kimmage
December 5, 2022 | Transcript of Zoom Videotaped Deposition of Elvis Chan
December 5, 2022 | Transcript of Videotaped Deposition of Dr. Anthony Fauci
November 21, 2022 | Order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
November 21, 2022 | Memorandum Order
November 18, 2022 | Transcript of Motion Hearing Before the Honorable Ivan D. Davis United States Magistrate Judge
November 15, 2022 | Transcript of Videotaped Deposition of Carol Crawford
November 2, 2022 | Memorandum Order
October 21, 2022 | Memorandum Order Regarding Witness Depositions
October 14, 2022 | Joint Statement Regarding Witness Depositions
October 6, 2022 | Second Amended Complaint
September 6, 2022 | Memorandum Ruling and Order on Discovery Disputes
September 1, 2022 | The Parties’ Joint Statement on Discovery Disputes
August 2, 2022 | First Amended Complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Monroe Division
PRESS RELEASES
March 23, 2023 | NCLA Releases Video Depositions in Social Media Censorship Suit After Judge Orders Case to Be Heard
March 20, 2023 | In NCLA Win, Federal Judge Rejects Motion to Dismiss Government-Induced Censorship Lawsuit
September 1, 2022 | NCLA Suit Uncovers Army of Federal Bureaucrats Coercing Social-Media Companies to Censor Speech
August 2, 2022 | NCLA Clients Join Missouri and Louisiana Suit Challenging Gov’t-Directed Social Media Censorship
OPINION
January 8, 2023 | The White House Covid Censorship Machine
December 12, 2022 | Is Social-Media Censorship a Crime?
September 21, 2022 | The U.S. Government’s Vast New Privatized Censorship Regime
MEDIA MENTIONS
__
eof
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti
You are welcome to show your opinion here!