Posted on 07/05/2023 1:58:13 AM PDT by EBH
WASHINGTON, July 4 (Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge on Tuesday restricted some agencies and officials of the administration of President Joe Biden from meeting and communicating with social media companies to moderate their content, according to a court filing.
The injunction came in response to a lawsuit brought by Republican attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, who alleged that U.S. government officials went too far in efforts to encourage social media companies to address posts they worried could contribute to vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 pandemic or upend elections.
The ruling said government agencies like the Department of Health and Human Services and the FBI could not talk to 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" under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
A White House official said the Justice Department was reviewing the order and will evaluate its options.
The litigation was originally filed by former Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry. Schmitt, who was elected to the U.S. Senate in November, used Twitter to welcome the injunction and called it a win for free speech.
The order also mentioned by name officials including Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Jen Easterly, who heads the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, in its restrictions.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
So, a judge ordered them not to do what they are already not supposed to do...
That’s some gooOOOooood governmenting!
They should know there no options, but they are looking for them ...
This response from the WH and DOJ makes me even more angry. Controlling speech, controlling narratives, all just mean We the People lose access to information that is critical to us living our lives ...that is best for us.
Good news if it holds...
different ways to achieve the same censorship!
this story has been breaking over the last 3 hours, during which time the visa was granted.
Nigel Farage was to be on this Turning Point Australia speaking tour as well. the prog left and the FakeNewsMSM have been pushing to have Jr banned for weeks - petition and all:
5 July: news.com.au: Donald Trump Jr.’s speaking tour in Australia postponed
Donald Trump Jr. has postponed his controversial speaking tour in Australia in a move that is believed to have been made due to visa issues.
by Chantelle Francis
Donald Trump Jr.’s controversial three-city speaking tour in Australia, due to start this weekend in Sydney, has been postponed.
Tour promoter Damien Costas said it was postponed because the Australian Government had not yet issued the son of the former US president a visa despite submitting the application in May, according to Sky News host Sharri Markson...
On Wednesday, ticket holders received an email from Ticketek informing them the tour, called Donald Trump Jr. Live, was postponed due to “unforeseen circumstances”...
“Turning Point wish to advise that, due to unforeseen circumstances, Donald Trump Jr. Live, scheduled to appear in Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne has been postponed,” a notice said on the event’s website.
“Ticket holders are urged to hold onto their tickets, with details of the rescheduled date to be confirmed in the coming days.”
(Sky News’ Sharri) Markson reported on Wednesday evening the visa was believed to have now been issued...
Home Affairs said all non-citizens who wish to enter or remain in Australia must satisfy identity, health, security and character requirements...
https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-jrs-speaking-tour-in-australia-postponed/news-story/050a370ad27a99dd1f946043678dc556
Unrelated? What’s this? Thread hi-jack
And now this...WH always trying get out of the box...
Like a judge is going to stop them from doing anything. What else is in the funny pages this morning?
The “mainstream” media outlets like the wapo were characterizing this ruling as some kind of “assault” on free speech instead of recognizing that it essentially helps to prevent government suppression of free speech. They also claimed that it would “endanger” people by allowing “hurtful” messages to be posted as if people are helpless to either ignore the tweets, posts etc. or simply block them.
They will just do it anyway.
“They will just do it anyway.”
Yes. If not blatantly, they’ll find work-arounds. The method is too powerful to just let it go; they can’t do that.
The result will be like the graft and corruption.
The Biden administration apparatchiks will speak to corporation A officials who will speak to corporation B officials who will make the social media threats. It’s now hard ball, no longer just asking
What if they just disregard what the judicial says about anything? That is what ‘rogue’ agencies do. As Biden said, he has more F-16s than the judges have.
They will disregard any judicial decisions that they disagree with. They are the law, not some ‘Trump’ appointee.
Another ruling that will be ignored
This is good, but I would like to see election interference charges.
I don’t believe they will ignore the court order.
They will appeal.
Democrats ignore laws that they don't like without any consequences whatsoever.
I agree!
The court should have cited the social media companies instead.
Biden does not care or will abide by SC Rulings
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.