A federal judge issued, on Tuesday, an injunction that bans Biden officials from meeting with or communicating with social media companies to demand they silence certain voices, declaring such attempts to crack down on free speech unconstitutional and Orwellian.
The injunction names a bevy of Biden officials and agency and orders that they must not commit certain actions, providing that they are enjoined and restrained from:
(1) meeting with social-media companies for the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech posted on social-media platforms;
(2) specifically flagging content or posts on social-media platforms and/or forwarding such to social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech;
(3) urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner social-media companies to change their guidelines for removing, deleting, suppressing, or reducing content containing protected free speech;
(4) emailing, calling, sending letters, texting, or engaging in any communication of any kind with social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech;
(5) collaborating, coordinating, partnering, switchboarding, and/or jointly working with the Election Integrity Partnership, the Virality Project, the Stanford Internet Observatory, or any like project or group for the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content posted with social-media companies containing protected free speech;
"*" indicates required fields
(6) threatening, pressuring, or coercing social-media companies in any manner to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce posted content of postings containing protected free speech;
(7) taking any action such as urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner social-media companies to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce posted content protected by the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution;
(8) following up with social-media companies to determine whether the social-media companies removed, deleted, suppressed, or reduced previous social-media postings containing protected free speech;
(9) requesting content reports from social-media companies detailing actions taken to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce content containing protected free speech; and
(10) notifying social-media companies to Be on The Lookout (“BOLO”) for postings containing protected free speech.
Sen. Eric Schmitt, who filed the lawsuit while the AG of Missouri in response to an effort from the Biden regime to force social media companies to censor content that was protected free speech but which they found objectionable. Schmitt said, in part, “White House officials, CDC & others are stopped cold. We need to continue the fight to take down the Vast Censorship Enterprise. Their view of “misinformation” isn’t an excuse to censor. This is the most important free speech case in a generation. Freedom is on the march.”
White House officials, CDC & others are stopped cold. We need to continue the fight to take down the Vast Censorship Enterprise.
Their view of “misinformation” isn’t an excuse to censor. This is the most important free speech case in a generation.
Freedom is on the march
— Eric Schmitt (@Eric_Schmitt) July 4, 2023
The judge, a Trump nominee, did allow for some exceptions. The Biden officials can inform social media company of posts regarding “criminal activity or criminal conspiracies,” “national security threats, extortion, or other threats,” and crimes related to our elections. Despite that, the broad restrictions are a major victory for free speech on social media.