This is an offense to the Constitution.

View this email in your browser ([link removed])
[link removed]



** For Immediate Release: July 12, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------


** SCOTUS Sidesteps Effort to Rein In Government Campaign to Coerce Tech Companies to Censor First Amendment Activity
------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a 6-3 ruling ([link removed]) , the U.S. Supreme Court has sidestepped a challenge to the federal government’s efforts to coerce social media companies into censoring users’ First Amendment expression.

Finding that the plaintiffs lacked standing, the Supreme Court declined to rule on the First Amendment issues in Murthy v. Missouri (formerly known as Missouri v. Biden). However, in his dissent ([link removed]) , Justice Alito warned that by avoiding the free speech issue, the Court “permits the [government’s] 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. …It was blatantly unconstitutional, and the country may come to regret the Court’s failure to say so.” In its amicus brief ([link removed]) , The Rutherford Institute argued that the federal government violated free speech rights by coercing and significantly encouraging social media companies to silence any viewpoints at odds with the government on issues ranging from COVID-19 safety measures and vaccines
to election fraud.

“Technofascism is the modern-day equivalent of book burning, which does away with controversial ideas and the people who espouse them,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People ([link removed]) . “As the Supreme Court previously recognized, ‘The people lose when the government is the one deciding which ideas should prevail.’ Once you allow government agencies and corporations to determine what viewpoints are ‘legitimate’ and which are not, you’re already moving fast down a slippery slope that ends with the censorship of all viewpoints other than those of the government and its corporate allies.”
MAKE THE GOVERNMENT PLAY BY THE RULES OF THE CONSTITUTION: SUPPORT THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM ([link removed])

For years now, federal officials from the White House, the Surgeon General’s Office, CDC, FBI, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency have been in regular contact with nearly every major American social media company about the spread of “misinformation” on their platforms, urging them to remove disfavored content and accounts from their sites. In turn, the social media companies gave government officials access to an expedited reporting system, downgraded or removed flagged posts, and deplatformed users. The platforms also changed their internal policies to capture more flagged content and sent steady reports on their moderation activities to government officials.

A First Amendment lawsuit was subsequently filed against the federal government, arguing that although the social media platforms stifled their users’ speech, it was government officials who were pulling the strings through private communications and threats. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include two epidemiologists who criticized COVID-19 lockdowns; a psychiatrist who opposed lockdowns and vaccine mandates; the owner of Gateway Pundit, a once-deplatformed news site; and the states of Missouri and Louisiana. In siding with the plaintiffs, both the trial court and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that government officials “engaged in a broad pressure campaign” by “relentlessly” asking the platforms to remove disfavored content and threatening to retaliate against inaction with legal reforms and enforcement actions. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed ([link removed]) upon finding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the
lawsuit. However, a similar case brought by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and others is still pending in the same trial court, and Justice Alito previously noted ([link removed]) that Kennedy has a much stronger claim to standing.

Affiliate attorney Christopher F. Moriarty assisted with advancing the arguments in the amicus brief ([link removed]) .

The Rutherford Institute ([link removed]) , a nonprofit civil liberties organization, provides legal assistance at no charge to individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or violated and educates the public on a wide spectrum of issues affecting their freedoms.

This press release is also available at www.rutherford.org ([link removed]) .

Source: [link removed]
[link removed] Share ([link removed])
[link removed]: https%3A%2F%2Fmailchi.mp%2Frutherford%2Fthe-government-pressured-tech-companies-to-censor-users-for-voicing-concerns-over-covid-election-fraud Tweet ([link removed]: https%3A%2F%2Fmailchi.mp%2Frutherford%2Fthe-government-pressured-tech-companies-to-censor-users-for-voicing-concerns-over-covid-election-fraud)
[link removed] Forward ([link removed])
CLICK HERE TO MAKE A TAX-DEDUCTIBLE DONATION ([link removed])

To donate via PayPal, please click below:
[link removed]

============================================================
** Follow us on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow us on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow us on Twitter ([link removed])
** Follow us on Twitter ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
CONTACT INFORMATION
Nisha Whitehead
(434) 978-3888 ext. 604
** [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])

THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE
Post Office Box 7482
Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482
Phone: (434) 978-3888
** www.rutherford.org ([link removed])

Copyright © 2024 The Rutherford Institute, All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because of your interest in the work of The Rutherford Institute. Founded in 1982 by constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute is a civil liberties organization that provides free legal services to people whose constitutional and human rights have been threatened or violated. To discontinue your membership electronically, or if you feel you are receiving this message in error, please follow the link below.

Under the regulations of the United States Internal Revenue Service, The Rutherford Institute is incorporated as a 501(c)(3) tax exempt nonprofit organization. Donations to support The Rutherford Institute’s legal and educational work help to safeguard the constitutional rights of all Americans. Donations are tax-deductible. In compliance with general industry standards of a nonprofit organization, the Institute is audited annually by an independent accounting firm.

** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])

** update subscription preferences ([link removed])