The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the plaintiffs in the Murthy v. Missouri case didn’t have standing to sue the Biden administration for pressuring social media companies to censor certain content.
One of the main purposes of PPPs is to hide illegal government actions in the "private" sector, where supposedly, there is nothing anyone can do about it. I think the court already ruled in another case that the govt. cannot hide what they are doing by using private corporations, especially when those corporations hold a charter that restricts their actions.
Social media receives governments benefits. It is incredible that anyone would argue such censorship is legal. This censorship has been devastating to our society, pitting people against each other and stopping the free sharing of information. There is nothing legal about the govt. hiding its own clear censorship by using so called "private" entities.
The majority ruling is counterfactual and ignores the very real illegality and harm of censorship. Honestly, I find some of the SC's members inability to grasp reality and the rule of law, horrifying.
I have watched people suffer and die from the governments lies and stopping out the truth. I feel these are people who simply do not care about others, the rule of law or a strong society where open debate is the coin of the realm.
So very disturbing. I think most of us who try to post truth about Covid, Kennedy, censorship, various freedoms, etc. have been shadow banned at a minimum for a number of years and that didn't stop during this trial. I'm sick about that and this very discouraging outcome. I've had serious doubts about the sanity of our SC, even more so after this decision. And I believe all the censorship of posts by and about Kennedy is election interference, it's beyond the pale. No accountability and those doing the harm know it.
I’m so disappointed. Shocked. I thought this was a no brainer, how can it be ok for the President to use the power and weight of his office to pressure private companies to censor individual American citizens exercising their right to free speech?
Further, you should address the issue with the Missouri plaintiffs, who opposed Kennedy plaintiffs intervention on two occasions, if they would not have worked so hard to keep Kennedy out of this case, this case would have had standing and would have been heard on merits
I see nothing but egos not wanting Kennedy in the case to take any limelight off of them because they promote this case for donations
So the Missouri v Biden will be separated from Kennedy V Biden at federal district crt? Or will the case go forward as Missouri V Biden since consolidated without the plaintiffs without standing? Or will the plaintiffs try to get another 26k pages of discovery looking for traceability which Louisana taxpayers are paying for.
I think the lawyers should have done a much better job at ensuring standing when they knew they needed to meet article III, and produce weak evidence for justification wherein no plaintiff was shown to be censored by anyone other than the tech platform which they all sign an agreement to follow their rules as a participant
Very disturbing indeed
One of the main purposes of PPPs is to hide illegal government actions in the "private" sector, where supposedly, there is nothing anyone can do about it. I think the court already ruled in another case that the govt. cannot hide what they are doing by using private corporations, especially when those corporations hold a charter that restricts their actions.
Social media receives governments benefits. It is incredible that anyone would argue such censorship is legal. This censorship has been devastating to our society, pitting people against each other and stopping the free sharing of information. There is nothing legal about the govt. hiding its own clear censorship by using so called "private" entities.
The majority ruling is counterfactual and ignores the very real illegality and harm of censorship. Honestly, I find some of the SC's members inability to grasp reality and the rule of law, horrifying.
I have watched people suffer and die from the governments lies and stopping out the truth. I feel these are people who simply do not care about others, the rule of law or a strong society where open debate is the coin of the realm.
This is so incredibly disappointing!
BEYOND disappointing - the censorship that can occur between now and the election is bottomless.
So very disturbing. I think most of us who try to post truth about Covid, Kennedy, censorship, various freedoms, etc. have been shadow banned at a minimum for a number of years and that didn't stop during this trial. I'm sick about that and this very discouraging outcome. I've had serious doubts about the sanity of our SC, even more so after this decision. And I believe all the censorship of posts by and about Kennedy is election interference, it's beyond the pale. No accountability and those doing the harm know it.
I’m so disappointed. Shocked. I thought this was a no brainer, how can it be ok for the President to use the power and weight of his office to pressure private companies to censor individual American citizens exercising their right to free speech?
Follow the money.
Further, you should address the issue with the Missouri plaintiffs, who opposed Kennedy plaintiffs intervention on two occasions, if they would not have worked so hard to keep Kennedy out of this case, this case would have had standing and would have been heard on merits
I see nothing but egos not wanting Kennedy in the case to take any limelight off of them because they promote this case for donations
So the Missouri v Biden will be separated from Kennedy V Biden at federal district crt? Or will the case go forward as Missouri V Biden since consolidated without the plaintiffs without standing? Or will the plaintiffs try to get another 26k pages of discovery looking for traceability which Louisana taxpayers are paying for.
I think the lawyers should have done a much better job at ensuring standing when they knew they needed to meet article III, and produce weak evidence for justification wherein no plaintiff was shown to be censored by anyone other than the tech platform which they all sign an agreement to follow their rules as a participant