We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.
In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court delivered Team Biden an “important election year victory, as CNN characterized a ruling Wednesday allowing the White House and federal agencies such as the FBI to lean on social media platforms to censor content viewed as misinformation.
Hunter Biden’s laptop fell into this category in the runup to the 2020 pandemic-marred election, as did COVID-19 information shared by medical professionals that did not support the prescribed pro-vaccine narrative at the time — the censored content standing up to the test of time, of course.
Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who wrote the majority opinion, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the three liberal justices in throwing out claims the Biden administration unlawfully coerced social media companies into removing contentious content, NBC News reported.
The decision overturned an injunction that would have limited contact between government officials and social media companies on a wide range of issues, according to the network.
Barrett said the plaintiffs, Republican attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, along with five social media users, failed to show they had suffered harm.
More from NBC News:
She noted that social media platforms routinely moderated content even before the alleged coercion happened.
“In fact, the platforms, acting independently, had strengthened their pre-existing content moderation policies before the government defendants got involved,” she added.
While the evidence shows government officials “played a role” in moderation choices, that is not enough to justify a sweeping injunction, Barrett wrote.
Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Neil Gorsuch, said in the dissent he authored that the case was “one of the most important free speech cases to reach this Court in years,” according to CNN.
“The Court, however, shirks that duty and thus permits the 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,” Alito wrote. “That is regrettable.”
Alito mincing no words in what SCOTUS has done with Murthy ruling:
“The Court…permits the 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” pic.twitter.com/uYYnNifJoF— Billy McMorris (@FBillMcMorris) June 26, 2024
Alito would also characterize the conduct of the officials sued in the case as “unconstitutional,” “coercive” and “dangerous.”
George Washington Law professor Jonathan Turley, a liberal, voiced the frustration felt by those who value free speech.
“The government is engaging in censorship by surrogate… they have made a mockery of the limits of the 1st Amendment,” Turley said during an appearance on Fox News.
Jonathan Turley breaks down the frustrating anti-free speech ruling in Murthy v. Missouri.
“The Government is engaging in censorship by surrogate… they have made a mockery of the limits of the 1st Amendment.” pic.twitter.com/K2eKnJtloF
— Media Research Center (@theMRC) June 26, 2024
The reaction on social media was swift.
“Huge victory at the Supreme Court for anti-speech movement,” posted The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway.
Huge victory at the Supreme Court for anti-speech movement.
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) June 26, 2024
Here is a sampling of other responses from X, including Glenn Beck, who called the ruling “an absolute gut punch.”
The Supreme Court has ruled that, practically, the government can continue pressuring social media companies to censor Americans. This is an absolute gut punch.
— Glenn Beck (@glennbeck) June 26, 2024
The Supreme Court got it wrong – and has failed to uphold its responsibility to the Constitution by finding no standing in Murthy v. Missouri. My case of Kennedy v. Biden will proceed in the trial court where there is no question that @ChildrensHD and I have standing. Justice…
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) June 26, 2024
Today’s disappointing Supreme Court decision in Murthy v. Missouri, holding that the various states were not harmed by government and Big Tech censorship, is a wake up call to all Americans.
Even with “conservative” judges like Amy Coney Barrett, we can’t expect any help from…
— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) June 26, 2024
The Supreme Court’s ruling and opinion on the widespread federal government campaign to censor and banish accounts that shared factual information about ongoing government operations is an abomination that ignores both the facts and the law. I never thought I would see the… pic.twitter.com/v5FzqQorPC
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) June 26, 2024
Protecting the Administrative State https://t.co/PkuPaTQPNc
— Max Edwards (@MaxEdwards1) June 26, 2024
The First Amendment is supposed to prevent the government from censoring speech and punishing people for expressing different views.
Apparently, the Biden Regime is (D)ifferent.
— ℎ (@chiIIum) June 26, 2024
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.