Another Big Freedom of Speech Win Against Totalitarian Biden Admin

Another important freedom of speech case, Missouri v. Biden, addresses whether the federal government violated the First Amendment by allegedly coercing social media companies to censor certain viewpoints.

U.S. Senator Eric Schmitt (R-MO) said after the landmark decision in the Missouri v. Biden lawsuit that Schmitt brought as Missouri Attorney General in 2022 reached a settlement and Consent Decree Tuesday.

The settlement prohibits the U.S. Surgeon General, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) from pressuring social media platforms into censoring constitutionally protected speech. It also prevents federal officials from interfering with how social media companies make their content moderation decisions.

“This is a massive win for the First Amendment and for every American who believes in free speech,” said Senator Schmitt. “Under Biden, we saw the most aggressively liberal and antiliberty excesses of government that America has ever seen, and as AG I sued the Administration for brazenly colluding with Big Tech to silence Missourians. From COVID to Hunter Biden’s laptop to the border, Biden officials at the highest levels of government tried to use Facebook, X, and YouTube as their speech police. But no longer. This decision locks in Americans’ First Amendment rights, and guarantees that even in the digital age, the federal government cannot deplatform protected speech they simply disagree with. Missouri struck first, and we won big. For every American who is tired of being silenced by your own government—this victory is yours.”

Schmitt continued:

The settlement resolves all remaining claims in the case through a consent decree rather than continued litigation. In it, the government agrees to a 10-year, court-enforceable injunction barring the Surgeon General, CDC, and CISA from threatening major social media platforms with legal, regulatory, or economic punishment to induce the removal, suppression, or algorithmic reduction of plaintiffs’ protected speech.

This settlement imposes the first concrete, operational limits on how certain federal officials may engage with social media platforms on protected speech. It reinforces the First Amendment principle that constitutional protections apply in the digital age and are not lost simply because the government labels speech as misinformation or disinformation. It also marks a meaningful constraint on the government’s future conduct in this area.

Discovery in this case uncovered a vast operation emanating from the highest levels of government, according to the New Civil Liberties Alliance. “NCLA revealed how agencies and the White House directed social media companies to censor viewpoints that conflicted with federal government messaging on topics ranging from Covid-19 to elections. These egregious First Amendment violations silenced NCLA’s clients and many other Americans.”

NCLA explains:

The Trump Administration condemned this censorship scheme in an Executive Order on President Trump’s first day back in office last year. He noted that the “government infringed on the constitutionally protected speech rights of American citizens across the United States in a manner that advanced the government’s preferred narrative about significant matters of public debate.” In today’s settlement, the Trump Administration agrees that government, politicians, media, academics, or anyone else labeling speech “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “malinformation” does not make it constitutionally unprotected. People are bound to make false statements now and then when they speak their minds, a freedom the First Amendment guarantees. This settlement helps safeguard that marketplace of ideas from the federal government. NCLA’s clients, Jill Hines and Aaron Kheriaty, are granted the right to enforce the Consent Decree should the government violate it.

Another such freedom of speech case involving physicians was quietly settled in 2023, as the Globe reported.

In January 2023, California’s new law to punish doctors for spreading “Covid misinformation,” went into effect. Assembly Bill 2098 authored by Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell), co-authored by then-Sen. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento), and signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom, circumvented due process against doctors over “Covid misinformation conduct,” and quashed their right to free speech.

California surgeon Dr. Peter Mazolewski said the purpose of Assembly Bill 2098 is to circumvent due process against doctors over “Covid misinformation conduct.”

AB 2098 punished physicians and surgeons for “unprofessional conduct” for advocating for the potential benefits of early treatment with off-label drugs, or those who dare to ask questions about COVID vaccine safety. The Globe reported in September ahead of the governor signing AB 2098, “As attorney Laura Powell of Californians for Good Governance noted, ‘Since AB 2098 explicitly restricts speech based on its content, it is presumptively invalid. The bill does not address the problem identified. The bill’s authors and supporters point to the problem of doctors who widely amplify falsehoods about Covid-19, but silencing them would violate the Constitution. To remedy the constitutional problems, it would have to be pared down to the point that it would simply duplicate existing law. Proponents are unable to cite a single example of a harm that could be prevented.’”

“AB 2098 will stifle scientific progress, harm public health, and violate doctors’ First Amendment rights,” Ethan Blevins, of the Pacific Legal Foundation wrote for the Globe. “California’s Medical Board does not enjoy a monopoly on truth. Punishing ideas that defy consensus is an excuse to punish heretics and stifle dissent.”

Even before AB 2098 went into effect, it was already used as a weapon to intimidate and punish doctors who dissent from mainstream views, lawyers with the New Civil Liberties Alliance reports. “Physicians have already experienced threats from other doctors and individuals on social media to use AB 2098 to have their licenses taken away, an obvious attempt to suppress the doctors’ speech,” the Globe reported.

Five physicians filed a lawsuit in November 2022 against the State of California over the new law, which attorneys said violates the 1st and 14th Amendments (free speech and due process). They were rewarded when California’s medical misinformation law suffered its first legal defeat later in January 2023. The five physicians, Drs. Aaron Kheriaty, Tracy Hoeg, Ram Duriseti, Pete Mazolewski, and Azadeh Khatibi, wanted to know who approves the “consensus?” When the Globe spoke with Dr. Mazolewski, he asked, “Who decides? The medical board? Public health officials?”

Judge William Shubb of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California granted a preliminary injunction blocking the state from enforcing AB 2098, ruling that the statute’s “unclear phrasing and structure” could have a “chilling effect.”

California lawmakers repealed the state’s controversial “medical misinformation” law meant to silence and punish physicians and surgeons who communicate and treat their patients in a way that deviates from the “official government position” regarding COVID-19.

Case by case, the Biden administration’s totalitarian rule is being overturned.