Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Missouri v. Biden

Published

5 minute read

From the Brownstone Institute

BY Aaron KheriatyAARON KHERIATY  

The Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments over the Fifth Circuit’s grant of a preliminary injunction in Missouri v. Biden. As I mentioned in previous posts, the injunction would bar officials from the White House, CDC, FBI, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and Surgeon General’s office from coercing or significantly encouraging social media platforms to censor constitutionally protected speech.

My fellow plaintiffs and I welcome this opportunity to defend the First Amendment rights of all Americans in the U.S. Supreme Court. We expect to hear from the Court soon regarding the hearing dates—it could be in February or March.

The Fifth Circuit panel of judges last month upheld the key components of U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty’s July 4 preliminary injunction order, prohibiting named federal officials from coercing or significantly encouraging social media companies to suppress legal speech.

That decision vindicated our claims that we—and countless other Americans—were blacklisted, shadow-banned, deboosted, throttled, and suspended on social media as part of the government’s years-long censorship campaign orchestrated by the federal government.

The Biden Administration’s censorship regime has successfully suppressed perspectives contradicting government-approved views on hotly disputed topics such as whether natural immunity to covid exists, the safety and efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines, the virus’s origins, and mask mandate efficacy.

Beyond covid, the documents we’ve obtained on discovery demonstrate that the government was also censoring critiques of its foreign policy, monetary policy, election infrastructure, and lighting rod social issues from abortion to gender ideology.

The vast, coordinated, and well-documented effort has silenced influential, highly qualified voices including doctors and scientists like my co-plaintiffs Dr. Bhattacharya and Dr. Kulldorff, as well as those like Jill Hines who have tried to raise awareness of issues. Though the US Supreme Court temporarily stayed the Fifth Circuit’s injunction until they make a ruling, I believes the Justices are ultimately unlikely to permit the egregious First Amendment abridgements our case has exposed.

The Fifth Circuit recognized that the Plaintiffs did “not challenge the social-media platforms’ content-moderation policies.” Rather, Plaintiffs challenged the government’s unlawful efforts to influence “enforcement of those policies.” The government gravely harmed the ability of Americans to convey their views to the public, and it deprived Americans of their right to hear opinions that differ from the government’s. Judge Doughty strikingly described the Administration’s conduct as “arguably the most massive attack against free speech in United States history” and “akin to an Orwellian Ministry of Truth.” He was right, and the US Supreme Court must not permit it.

Here are some reactions to the news from our lawyers at NCLA:

“NCLA is thrilled to have the opportunity to vindicate the First Amendment rights of our clients, and all Americans, in the nation’s highest court. We are confident that after a thorough review of the disturbing facts in this important case—which involves unprecedented government-imposed, viewpoint-based censorship—the Court will recognize the grievous, unconstitutional nature of the government’s conduct and enjoin it.”
— Jenin Younes, Litigation Counsel, NCLA

“We are disappointed Americans’ First Amendment rights will be vulnerable to government infringement until this case is decided. But we are confident this Court, as strong as it is on First Amendment issues, will rule against the government and uphold our clients’ rights and liberties.”
— John Vecchione, Senior Litigation Counsel, NCLA

“If anything, the Fifth Circuit’s decision did not go far enough in enjoining the reprehensible conduct exposed in this case. The facts of this case show government agencies censored speech in a deliberate effort to control the narrative on several controversial topics ahead of the last election. The First Amendment forbids such censorship, and the Supreme Court must never allow such mischief again, if we are to keep our democracy.”
— Mark Chenoweth, President, NCLA

Republished from the author’s Substack

Author

  • Aaron Kheriaty

    Aaron Kheriaty, Senior Brownstone Scholar and 2023 Brownstone Fellow, is a psychiatrist working with the Unity Project. He is a former Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California at Irvine School of Medicine, where he was the director of Medical Ethics.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Bill would prevent congressional members from trading stocks

Published on

From The Center Square

By

U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Arizona, has co-introduced a bill to prevent members of Congress from trading stocks.

The Ban Congressional Stock Trading Act requires all members of Congress, their spouses and dependent children to put their stocks in a qualified blind trust or divest the holding. In doing so, Kelly’s office said this ensures members and their family members cannot use inside information to influence trades and profit off those transactions.

“As Americans work hard to keep up with rising costs, the last thing they should have to worry about is whether their elected representatives are using inside information to make a quick buck,” said Kelly in a press release. “This isn’t rocket science; the only way to stop insider trading in Congress is to stop members of Congress from trading stocks. Period.”

Kelly said he believes he already has the support of the American people.

Pointing to a survey by the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy, Kelly said 86% of Americans back such a measure. That includes 88% of Democrats, 87% of Republicans and 81% of Independents.

“Fixing this would go a long way toward restoring trust — and fixing what’s broken in Washington,” said Kelly.

U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Georgia, also introduced the bill. Ossoff said members of congress have “extraordinary access to confidential information” at the same time they are making federal policy. Because of this, Ossoff said members of Congress should not be playing the stock market.

“Stock trading by members of Congress massively erodes public confidence in Congress and creates a serious appearance of impropriety, which is why we should ban stock trading by members of Congress altogether,” said Ossoff.

The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois, Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisconsin, Jeanne Shaheen, D-New Hampshire, Raphael Warnock, D-Georgia, and Michael Bennet, D-Colorado. Bennett, who is The Center Square for governor of Colorado, said it is “common-sense legislation.”

Kelly has already placed his assets in qualified blind trusts, released his official Senate schedule and refused corporate PAC contributions for his campaign.

Continue Reading

Energy

Trump signs executive orders to help nuclear industry in U.S.

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

President Donald Trump signed several executive orders on nuclear energy Friday that Trump said would make the U.S. the “real power” in the industry.

From the White House: President Trump Signs Executive Orders in the Oval Office, May 23, 2025

U.S. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said the orders marked “a huge day for the nuclear industry,” enabling America to pursue nuclear innovation in ways it hasn’t done for decades.

“Mark this day on your calendar. This is going to turn the clock back on over 50 years of overregulation of the industry,” Burgum said.

Each of the executive orders addresses issues that have stifled the industry’s growth in the U.S. and in doing so, promote energy independence, Burgum said. A key priority of the Trump administration has been making America less dependent on foreign countries economically and in terms of energy production, as the administration sees American dependence on other countries as a national security vulnerability.

Assistant to the President and White House Staff Secretary Will Scharf explained each of the orders at the president’s signing session. Several focus mostly on peeling back regulations, while others activate new permissions or programs to spur industry growth.

One order centers on changes to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

“Before 1978, there were 133 reactors built in the United States. Since 1978, only two new commercial reactors have come online. That’s because of overregulation,” Scharf said.

In recalibrating the commission, the administration hopes to clear the way for the industry to expand to quadruple the current amount of nuclear power production within the next 25 years.

Another order, as others of Trump’s executive orders have done, invokes emergency powers through the Defense Production Act, expanding the president’s powers related to domestic industry. Both Trump and former President Joe Biden have invoked the Defense Production Act for national defense and emergency preparedness reasons throughout their terms.

In this case, it’s to “spur a closer collaboration with private industry to ensure that we have the fuel supplies we need for a modernized nuclear energy sector,” Scharf said. The order also aims to boost the development of a nuclear energy sector workforce, as well as some other key industry “building blocks.”

Another aims to speed up the permitting process for new types of nuclear technology like micro-reactors, small modular reactors, and Generation IV and Generation III+ reactors, which have “revolutionary potential,” according to the order.  Within that goal, the order directs the establishment of a new pilot program for reactor construction with the target of having three reactors operating by July 4, 2026.

Several industry leaders were also present at the orders’ signing to affirm how they would accelerate growth for their companies.

Continue Reading

Trending

X