When Biden first came into office, numerous members of his administration started to work with big tech to shut down what they deemed to be harmful opinions.
Yet again, the courts have ruled that the administration overstepped its bounds.
The case centers around the actions of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) after Biden took office.
This was an agency that was created to protect Americans from foreign attacks, but the agency was turned against Americans, violating free speech during the early days of the Biden administration.
And it went much further than that.
There were administration officials who were also working in conjunction with big tech to shut down narratives they simply did not like.
Americans had legitimate questions and concerns during the pandemic, and their questions, comments, and studies ended up being censored on these platforms. It was what we saw regarding the Hunter Biden laptop on steroids.
Simply put, if you did not go along with Biden's narrative, you risked having your account either temporality or permanently suspended.
According to GOP Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey:
"CISA was created to protect Americans from foreign attack, and now it has begun targeting its own citizens."
The case's latest stop was before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, where Biden has lost again.
CISA has maintained that it did nothing more than "flag" posts it was concerned about, and then it left the action up to the platform.
The court agreed with exactly what you are thinking… if the government suggests you shut something down, you shut it down or you suffer the wrath of the government.
The ruling stated:
"Thus, when the platforms acted to censor CISA-switchboarded content, they did not do so independently. Rather, the platforms' censorship decisions were made under policies that CISA has pressured them into adopting and based on CISA's determination of the veracity of the flagged information.
"Thus, CISA likely significantly encouraged the platforms' content-moderation decisions and thereby violated the First Amendment."
So, an injunction is now in place to stop the CISA from continuing to censor activity such as this.
The injunction states:
"If the allegations made by Plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States' history.
"In their attempts to suppress alleged disinformation, the Federal Government, and particularly the Defendants named here, are alleged to have blatantly ignored the First Amendment's right to free speech."
This all comes down to who gets to determine the definition of misinformation and disinformation.
People having legitimate concerns or referring to studies the government chooses to selectively ignore is not misinformation, but that is how the Biden administration was portraying these actions.
Look at what happened to Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) on YouTube for daring to challenge Dr. Fauci, and yet it turns out that virtually everything Paul said was true.
We have a dishonest man in the White House, yet this is the man who gets to shut down what other people are saying?
If you have ever read my posts in other publications on this, I often referred to social media and most mainstream media outlets as state-run media, and this ruling proves that I was right all along.
There is a vast difference between misinformation and statements people simply do not like. That line has been blurred for the better part of the last three years.
While the courts are finally clearing this up, the crises that could have possibly been avoided during that time can never be changed. Hopefully, everyone learns a very hard lesson from this, and we never go down this path again.
Unfortunately, I don't see that happening, as the Democrat Party is closer than ever to a communist state. What is even sadder is that the upcoming generation seems to prefer this over the blueprint that was laid out by our Framers and Founders.