Posted on 06/26/2024 9:43:27 AM PDT by bitt
Justice Samuel Alito excoriated the Supreme Court majority for “shirk[ing]” its duty to restrain the government’s coercive censorship efforts in “one of the most important free speech cases” to reach the high court in years.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday sided 6-3 with the Biden administration in Murthy v. Missouri, finding that two states and five individual plaintiffs lacked standing to seek an injunction against the government’s wide-ranging efforts to suppress speech online. The case concerned the federal government requesting social media companies such as Facebook and Twitter remove certain content related to COVID-19 and other hot-button issues; many of the posts that were censored were factual, and critics argued the Biden administration attempted to censor conservative viewpoints
In his dissent, Alito, who was joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, argued that the majority’s decision “permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear, and think.”
“Their communications with Facebook were virtual demands,” he wrote, pointing to the White House’s many requests to remove “misinformation” related to COVID-19. “And Facebook’s quavering responses to those demands show that it felt a strong need to yield.”
p
This looks to be bad news. Dang.
Not clear to me on what grounds the majority made their ruling.
But, it is a dangerous precedent and very disappointing to me.
Amy Conehead and Kavanaugh disappoint as usual.
OTOH, it was about how the plaintiffs "lack standing". It's not a judgment about the merits of the case.
So someone else can try ASAP, and we can hope they have standing.
also,
https://dailycaller.com/2024/06/26/exclusive-jim-jordan-lindsey-graham-cpac-letter/
EXCLUSIVE: CPAC Pressures Jim Jordan, Lindsey Graham To Open Congressional Investigation Into ‘Sabotage’ Of Supreme Court
This issue of “standing” will be the death of our nation. How many extremely important issues/cases have been ignored by SCOTUS purely on this basis. “And the band played on....”
Just "lack of standing", nothing about the actual merits of the case.
Musk should be shamed in providing the strong evidence he has from Twitter to provide to new plaintiffs.
Bingo. As I mentioned in another post on this same topic, Kavanaugh and Barrett once again betrayed their supposed conservative leanings, with Roberts pulling his usual Benedict Arnold routine. Much as I hate to say it, Trump really screwed up when he chose Kavanaugh and Barrett for the SC.
bttt
A very bad decision. The leftists used “public health” as the shield for this BS. Now they have free range to crush dissent.
the squishes rule that tyranny is allowed under the USC
Not good on this issue, but hopefully good in the long haul.
Worst ruling since Dedd Scott.
“Their communications with Facebook were virtual demands,” he wrote, pointing to the White House’s many requests to remove “misinformation” related to COVID-19. “And Facebook’s quavering responses to those demands show that it felt a strong need to yield.”
He’s 100% correct about this. But this would mean that Facebook has the legal standing to sue the U.S. government over this censorship. I don’t see how state governments and private citizens or advocacy groups would have any basis for a legal claim against the government censors here.
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.