Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been granted permission to proceed with his censorship lawsuit against the Biden administration. U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty ruled on Tuesday that Kennedy meets the standing requirements set by the Supreme Court in a recent decision.
The Daily Caller reported that the judge found "ample evidence" of past censorship directed at Kennedy by government actors and a "substantial risk" of continued suppression.
The ruling follows a June Supreme Court decision dismissing a similar case brought by states and individuals alleging First Amendment violations. Judge Doughty determined that Kennedy's situation satisfies the more stringent criteria established by the high court, which requires specific evidence of government pressure on platforms to censor particular topics and individuals.
The Supreme Court's decision in Murthy v. Missouri set a new standard for censorship cases against the government. Judge Doughty explained that under this ruling, courts must find concrete evidence of a specific government entity pressuring a particular platform to censor a specific topic, resulting in the suppression of a plaintiff's speech on that topic.
In Kennedy's case, the court found that these requirements were met. Judge Doughty noted that Kennedy was part of the "Disinformation Dozen" specifically targeted by the government over alleged COVID-19 misinformation.
The judge stated there was "not much dispute" that Kennedy and his organization, Children's Health Defense, were directly targeted by several government entities, including the White House, the Office of the Surgeon General, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
The court also considered Kennedy's status as a 2024 presidential candidate as a factor in determining the risk of future injury. Judge Doughty provided a hypothetical scenario where government actions could lead to the censorship of Kennedy's campaign posts, demonstrating the ongoing potential for First Amendment violations.
Prior to this ruling, Judge Doughty had granted Kennedy an injunction in February 2024, prohibiting multiple federal agencies from coercing or significantly encouraging platforms to suppress protected speech. However, this injunction was put on hold pending the Supreme Court's decision in the related case.
Following the Supreme Court's ruling, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals returned the case to the district court to reassess the plaintiffs' standing under the new criteria. Judge Doughty's recent decision is a response to this directive, allowing Kennedy's case to move forward while adhering to the Supreme Court's guidelines.
New Civil Liberties Alliance litigation counsel Jenin Younes commented on the ruling:
It is gratifying that Judge Doughty found RFK, Jr. and Children's Health Defense have standing, even under the draconian requirements the Supreme Court developed in Murthy. We are assessing next steps for the Murthy plaintiffs in light of Judge Doughty's opinion, which will also assist us in crafting discovery requests to ensure we can demonstrate standing going forward.
The court's decision to allow Kennedy's lawsuit to proceed has significant implications for the ongoing debate over free speech and government influence on social media platforms. As a presidential candidate, Kennedy's ability to communicate freely on these platforms is particularly relevant to the democratic process.
The case highlights the tension between efforts to combat misinformation and the protection of First Amendment rights. Judge Doughty's ruling suggests that courts may be willing to scrutinize government actions that could be construed as pressuring private companies to censor protected speech, even when framed as efforts to combat disinformation.
In conclusion, Judge Terry Doughty's ruling allows Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to pursue his censorship lawsuit against the Biden administration, finding that he meets the standing requirements set by the Supreme Court. The decision is based on evidence of past government-directed censorship and the risk of future suppression, particularly given Kennedy's status as a presidential candidate. This case will likely continue to be closely watched as it addresses critical issues of free speech, government influence, and the role of social media in political communication.
