John,

On Monday the Supreme Court heard arguments in a major Big Tech case involving Google, Meta (Facebook and Instagram), and X (formerly known as Twitter).

We filed an Amicus Brief – and Justice Clarence Thomas raised the same questions we did in our brief.

Here’s a quick rundown:

Texas and Florida adopted policies that aim to limit viewpoint discrimination from Big Tech companies. It’s no surprise the Big Tech platforms are doubling down claiming an inability to censor users tramples their First Amendment rights.

However, we argue that when corporations like Facebook and Google collude with the government to decide who is and isn’t allowed to express themselves, they become state actors and must abide by the First Amendment.

In other words, it is unconstitutional for government officials to pressure Big Tech to censor political opponents’ speech, much like the state of California did with Twitter when Twitter censored our client Rogan O’Handley following the 2020 election.

If government officials are allowed to continue leveraging the power of government to censor political opponents, tyranny is the result.

We’re waiting for the Supreme Court to take up our case on behalf of Rogan, but in the meantime, we’re doing whatever we can to fight for free speech in the modern public square and to put an end to Big Tech censorship.