Supreme Court
Biographies of the current Supreme Court Justices; 2019 Supreme Court Decisions Supreme court nominations and votes since 1789
Archive Related Items

The 1st Amendment is ignored

6/26/24
from The Gray Area:
6/26/24:
Today's Supreme Court decision in Murthy vs Missouri, was two states and five individual social media users who sued executive branch officials and agencies, alleging that the government pressured the platforms to censor their speech in violation of the First Amendment. The Court's decision — the respondents lack Article III standing to seek an injunction. This is the most impactful decision of this year, where the Court decided to ignore the 1st Amendment. The decision will affect the election as it did in 2020. As even The New York Times states; The Supreme Court by a 6-to-3 vote, left for another day fundamental questions about what limits the First Amendment imposes on the government’s power to influence the technology companies that are the main gatekeepers of information in the internet era. My first reaction is how can the Court miss such an obvious Constitutional violation and government overreach? From an interview this weekend, Mike Benz explains in painful detail how the government has established a 'censorship industry'. He explains how the CIA, Defense Department, State Department, FBI, NSC, DHS, referred to as 'the blob' by President Obama, working with NATO organizations, British intelligence, the national science foundation in support for the WEF, IMF, WHO, EU and other world powers, created the Election Integrity Project and CISA (Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency). The US government 'blob' then participated in establishing a private network of media rating agencies, Newsguard, Global Disinformation Index, Graphica, and others, even sitting on the board of Newsguard, to provide plausible deniability for a Big Tech Censorship program. Everyone on the conservative sides believes and has volumes of evidence about how this cabal targeting anyone who spoke unapproved government speech about the 2020 election or COVID. Yet the Court apparently believes that the 1st Amendment is not in immediate jeopardy. The Wall Street Journal said it this way: A Supreme Court License for Social-Media Censorship  My 2nd reaction was that maybe this was not the fault of the Court.  Maybe the prosecutors who brought the case did not do a good job of presenting the facts and showing the harms done.  I am not a lawyer, but the Court said the respondents 'did not have standing', meaning they could not show that Missouri or Louisiana actually received harm from the government's actions.  Evidence of this is the Missouri AG said they will return with this case. That is no help now. My 3rd reaction is the bi-partisan 6-3 decision.  Democrats and the progressive left are up in arms about a right -wing Court that needs to be packed with left-wingers. Yet this decision illustrated supposedly right-wing Justices voting with the liberal block of 3 Justices, creating a sizable 6-3 bi-partisan decision.  This follows the unanimous 9-0 decision in the abortion pill case. Where is the radical Court we hear so much about? Yet MSNBC ran this headline on the decision: Alito dissents from latest Fifth Circuit standing smackdown. Not happy with the victory, now targeting even the minority of 3 justices in this decision, in a lame attempt to keep the radical Supreme Court political narrative alive. My final reaction is about this years election and the impact this decision will have.  It is now a 100% conclusion that Biden will get his second term ( the fourth Obama term). Evidence reveals the success this 'censorship industry' had in 2020 & 2022, now with more experience and a Supreme Court license to censor anything they want, this election is done. This will at a minimum add another reason to dispute the 2024 election results. Overall, a decision with historic, and potentially catastrophic, results for this country's future. More From SCOTUS Blog:


365 Days Page
Archive Related Items
Comment ( 0 )