Connect with us

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

International

Trump vows to pause migration after D.C. shooting

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

President Donald Trump said Thursday he will pause migration from some countries following the shooting of two National Guard members near the White House.

The suspected gunman, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, is an Afghan national who entered the U.S. in 2021 under a Biden-era immigration program for Afghans fleeing the Taliban movement. He was reportedly granted asylum this year.

U.S. Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died from injuries she sustained in the Wednesday shooting, Trump told service members in a video call Thursday night. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, was in critical condition. Lakanwal was also injured in the shooting.

The two victims were members of the West Virginia National Guard sent to Washington, D.C. in August under Trump’s orders for a crackdown on crime.

In a lengthy social media post on Thursday, Trump claimed “reverse migration” is the answer to years of mass migration and said he plans to “permanently pause migration from all third world countries to allow the U.S. system to fully recover.”

Trump also appeared to consider removing migrants who have become U.S. citizens. He said he will “remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States, or is capable of loving our Country.”

He said the federal government will end all “benefits and subsidies to noncitizens, denaturalize migrants who undermine domestic tranquility, and deport and foreign nation who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western Civilization.”

The FBI said they are conducting investigations in Washington State, the suspect’s last known residence, as well as connections he may have had in San Diego.

FBI Director Kash Patel said the bureau has executed “multiple search warrants around the country.”

Patel said Lakanwal had a “relationship in Afghanistan with partner forces.” Multiple reports claim Lakanwal worked alongside the Central Intelligence Agency while in Afghanistan.

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Zelenskyy Under Siege As Top Aide Resigns After Home Raided In Major Corruption Scandal

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Wallace White

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, resigned Friday after his home was raided in an ongoing corruption probe that threatens to undermine Zelenskyy’s grip on power during wartime.

Ukrainian authorities on Friday raided the home of Andriy Yermak, Zelenskyy’s chief of staff and right-hand man, as part of a sweeping corruption probe investigating Zelenskyy’s possible involvement in a $100 million scheme to defraud the nation’s atomic energy company. Yermak’s resignation comes at a time when Zelenskyy is under increasing pressure to accept a U.S.-brokered peace deal to end Ukraine’s war with Russia.

The investigation has shaken Ukrainian confidence in Zelenskyy’s administration while Russian strikes continue to rock critical infrastructure. So far, Russia has not commented on the new proposed peace deal.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

Ukrainian opposition party European Solidarity called for a no-confidence vote to remove Zelenskyy from power, but so far attempts to remove him have failed.

Zelenskyy first rose to power on an anti-corruption platform in the 2019 elections, which propelled him into the international spotlight. He has enjoyed a positive global reputation during the three-year war with Russia and has been hailed by numerous Western leaders as a beacon of democracy against autocratic Russia.

Zelenskyy has so far worked with the U.S. on the proposed peace agreement, but has also expressed major reservations about what it will mean for his country. In a public address on November 21, Zelenskyy said the plan puts Ukraine in the position of “either losing its dignity or the risk of losing a key partner.”

Despite the prospect of losing U.S. intelligence sharing and weapons if Ukraine doesn’t accept the deal, Zelenskyy has been shoring up European alliances and international support, most recently signing a deal with France to obtain 100 Rafale jets for its air force. The deal also included anti-air equipment, drones and other munitions.

The Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

Continue Reading

Trending

X