In a ruling last week, a federal appeals court overruled U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, whose own ruling concluded there is “substantial evidence” of a far-reaching censorship campaign by the federal government to control opinions and views it opposes that were posted on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
Citing that evidence, the judge then ordered the federal government to stop communicating with social media while a lawsuit moves forward unless the issue is an emergency, such as a cyber attack or criminal activity.
After attorneys for the Biden administration filed an appeal, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay on Judge Doughty’s order, meaning the appeals court temporarily blocked the judge’s order that restricts future contact.
The back-to-back rulings come after Republican attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri sued in 2022 alleging the federal government was censoring unwanted views about the COVID-19 pandemic and allegations of election fraud.
U.S. Sen. Eric Schmitt, who was the Missouri attorney general when the lawsuit was filed, said on Twitter the ruling by Judge Doughty was “a huge win for the First Amendment and a blow to censorship.”
Brad Dacus, an attorney who leads Pacific Justice Institute, tells AFN Judge Doughty should be praised for condemning our federal government for censoring free speech.
“Private companies – social media companies – have the freedom, presently, to have tremendous discretion on what they choose to post or not post,” Dacus observes. “However, the government cannot use them as a proxy.”
Judge Doughty’s ruling, which appropriately hit on Independence Day, named names, too. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security were prohibited from “encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”
When the federal government appealed the judge’s ruling hours later, a White House spokesman did not deny the censorship allegations to the news media but rather seemed to defend its Orwellian-like behavior.
“This administration has promoted responsible actions to protect public health, safety, and security when confronted by challenges like a deadly pandemic and foreign attacks on our elections,” the spokesman told The Associated Press for its story. “Our consistent view remains that social media platforms have a critical responsibility to take account of the effects their platforms are having on the American people, but make independent choices about the information they present.”
Similarly, on the liberal news networks, political pundits complained Judge Doughty was censoring free speech by ordering the communication to stop.
"Where's the line? Who's going to police this?" one CNN commentator ironically complained.
Although Dacus is not directly involved in the censorship-fighting censor, he says he has been following the case closely. Like many, he concluded the federal government got caught violating the First Amendment rights of American citizens.
“Make no mistake: This is not over,” he tells AFN. “We are somewhat optimistic that the Supreme Court, if necessary, will rule in favor of our First Amendment rights.”
