LA AG Jeff Landry celebrates victory in Gov-Big Tech censorship case as Independence Day win.

Victory for the First Amendment: Federal Court Partially Restrains Government from Censoring Americans’ Speech on Social Media

A federal court has issued a preliminary injunction that partially restrains the federal government from working with big tech companies to censor Americans’ speech on social media platforms. Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry hailed this decision as a major victory for the First Amendment.

Describing the legal battle as “one of the most massive undertakings of the federal government to limit American speech in the history of our country,” Landry expressed his satisfaction with the court’s ruling. He emphasized the importance of the case, stating that it could be one of the most significant First Amendment cases in modern history.

U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty of Louisiana granted the injunction in the case of State of Missouri v. Joseph R Biden Jr., brought by the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri in a 2022 lawsuit.

Uncovering Disturbing Evidence

During the legal proceedings, Landry and his team uncovered shocking evidence of coordination between high-ranking White House officials and social media platforms to target and remove content from certain individuals. Landry mentioned email chains that revealed direct requests to take down content from individuals such as Robert Kennedy Jr., Tucker Carlson, and Tomi Lauren.

The court also found evidence suggesting that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) knew about the authenticity of Hunter Biden’s laptop but failed to inform social media platforms about it.

Injunction ‘Begins Curtailing’ Government Overreach

The injunction, described as a “broad” measure by Landry, prohibits the listed government actors involved in the case from engaging with social media companies to censor Americans’ speech. It aims to curtail government interference in determining what is considered information, disinformation, and misinformation on social media platforms.

The ruling restrains several government agencies and individuals from pressuring or inducing the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech. It specifically names officials and agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and more.

‘Put a Fence Around’ Government Authority

The lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri alleges that the federal government overstepped its boundaries by pressuring social media companies to suppress information related to vaccine hesitancy and election matters. The lawsuit also addresses concerns regarding election integrity and news articles about Hunter Biden’s laptop.

In his ruling, Judge Doughty cited “substantial evidence” of a far-reaching censorship campaign, comparing the United States Government’s role during the COVID-19 pandemic to an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth.”

Landry Warns Against Government Becoming ‘Arbiter of Truth’

Landry emphasized the importance of the First Amendment in allowing Americans to make informed decisions and warned against a scenario where the government becomes the sole arbiter of truth. He stated that when the government assumes this role, citizens become subjects rather than active participants in their democracy.

Addressing concerns that the ruling could hinder efforts to combat false and misleading narratives about COVID-19 and other issues, Landry criticized the notion that the government knows best when it comes to safeguarding Americans’ health. He emphasized that dealing with foreign influences is nothing new for the United States and that the First Amendment is designed to protect citizens’ ability to make their own informed decisions.