{"id":2393698,"date":"2025-01-22T11:21:02","date_gmt":"2025-01-22T16:21:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/zuckerberg-confirms-scotus-ignored-proof-of-fed-censorship\/"},"modified":"2025-01-22T11:22:16","modified_gmt":"2025-01-22T16:22:16","slug":"zuckerberg-confirms-scotus-ignored-proof-of-fed-censorship","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/zuckerberg-confirms-scotus-ignored-proof-of-fed-censorship\/","title":{"rendered":"Zuckerberg Confirms SCOTUS Ignored Proof Of Fed Censorship"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">16<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fzuckerberg-confirms-scotus-ignored-proof-of-fed-censorship%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2393698&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>In a recent\u200b interview with Joe Rogan, Meta CEO Mark zuckerberg acknowledged the meaningful pressure the Biden administration exerted on <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/ga-poll-watcher-it-expert-non-trump-supporter-affidavit-sudden-surge-of-20000-mail-in-votes-for-biden-in-early-hours-on-nov\/\" title=\"GA Poll Watcher, IT Expert, Non-Trump Supporter Affidavit: Sudden Surge of 20,000 Mail-In-Votes For Biden In Early Hours On Nov\">social media companies<\/a>, including Meta,\u200c to censor speech related to Covid-19 and other topics. He stated that this \u200dpush for censorship by\u200c social media companies may not have been legal. This admission has\u200d drawn \u2064attention to\u2064 the Supreme Court&#8217;s handling of the case &#8220;Murthy\u200b v. Missouri,&#8221; which\u200d involved allegations that the\u200c government colluded with \u200dsocial media to suppress certain viewpoints, especially regarding the Hunter \u2063Biden laptop story and election\u200d integrity. The \u200dplaintiffs argued that this \u200dconstituted a First Amendment violation.<\/p>\n<p>The trial judge, Terry A.Doughty,ruled that federal authorities engaged \u200cin what could \u200bbe one\u2063 of the most significant attacks on free speech in U.S. history, issuing a \u2063preliminary injunction\u2063 against\u2063 further government censorship. This ruling was largely upheld by\u2062 the Fifth Circuit \u2064Court of Appeals. however, when \u2064the case reached the Supreme Court, many justices appeared to exhibit a narrow interpretation of the First amendment, raising concerns about their willingness to\u2064 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/no-free-speech-doesnt-mean-porn-in-schools\/\" title=\"No, Free Speech Doesn\u2019t Mean Porn In Schools\">uphold free speech rights<\/a> in the face of governmental pressure to\u2063 censor \u200ddisfavored information.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>Following Mark Zuckerberg&rsquo;s putative <a href=\"https:\/\/nypost.com\/2025\/01\/07\/opinion\/mark-zuckerberg-promises-not-to-censor-anymore-will-he-make-up-for-punishing-truth-tellers-before\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">mea culpa<\/a> for having made Meta complicit in the largest censorship regime in American history, and his vow to restore free expression on his platforms, the CEO made perhaps his most consequential statement of all in an interview with Joe Rogan.<\/p>\n<p>There, after describing the pressure campaign the Biden administration waged against his company to suppress disfavored speech, primarily regarding Covid-19, Zuckerberg <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=7k1ehaE0bdU\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">told<\/a> Rogan: &ldquo;I don&rsquo;t think that the pushing for social media companies to censor stuff was legal.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>The Meta CEO&rsquo;s silence as this very issue was being litigated all the way up to the Supreme Court was as deafening then as it is maddening now. But in making this assertion, he has inadvertently highlighted one of the Roberts Court&rsquo;s gravest derelictions of duty &mdash; one that emphasizes the necessity of vigorous executive and legislative actions in defense of our rights, actions like those <a href=\"https:\/\/www.realclearinvestigations.com\/articles\/2025\/01\/09\/how_trump_plans_to_take_on_censors_-_and_they_plan_to_take_on_trump_1083366.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">promised<\/a> by the Trump administration and some in Congress.<\/p>\n<p>The dereliction of duty came in the Supreme Court&rsquo;s punting of the case of <em>Murthy v. Missouri<\/em>, previously known as <a href=\"https:\/\/nypost.com\/2023\/06\/09\/this-federal-case-could-help-end-federal-policing-of-public-speech\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>Missouri v. Biden<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Plaintiffs in the case obtained and <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\">marshaled voluminous evidence demonstrating<\/a> that senior Biden White House officials and federal agencies coerced, cajoled, and colluded directly <a href=\"https:\/\/www.realclearinvestigations.com\/articles\/2023\/11\/06\/documents_shed_new_light_on_feds_collusion_with_private_actors_to_police_speech_on_social_media_990672.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">and indirectly<\/a> with social media companies to purge disfavored news and views en masse on matters ranging from the Hunter Biden laptop story to election integrity and Covid-19. The defendants did so on ostensible grounds of combatting dangerous &ldquo;mis-, dis-, and mal-information.&rdquo; In deputizing non-governmental actors as its speech police, the plaintiffs argued, the feds engaged in a conspiracy to violate the First Amendment by proxy.<\/p>\n<p>The case, alongside congressional investigations and reportage including the &ldquo;Twitter Files,&rdquo; helped expose the size, scope, and nature of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/how-trump-derangement-gave-birth-to-the-censorship-industrial-complex\/\" title=\"How Trump Derangement Gave Birth To The\u00a0Censorship-Industrial\u00a0Complex\">censorship-industrial complex<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>It also shook the complex&rsquo;s very foundations. The trial judge, Terry A. Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, found that authorities had engaged in perhaps &ldquo;the most massive attack against free speech in United States&rsquo; history.&rdquo; In response, he imposed a preliminary injunction on the feds barring their censorious conduct during the pendency of the case.<\/p>\n<p>The defendants appealed. But Judge Doughty&rsquo;s counterparts on the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.newsweek.com\/courts-strike-blow-against-white-houses-social-media-censorship-opinion-1826831\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2023\/10\/05\/fifth-circuit-corrects-critical-error-in-prior-ruling-to-shut-down-deep-state-censorship-tactic\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">largely upheld<\/a> his ruling.<\/p>\n<p>So the feds took their <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/opinion\/u-s-government-says-inability-to-censor-you-causes-it-irreparable-harm-5385717\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">argument<\/a> to the Supreme Court. There, <a href=\"https:\/\/nypost.com\/2024\/03\/18\/opinion\/the-supreme-court-hints-it-may-give-away-our-free-speech-rights-in-social-media-censorship-case\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">shockingly<\/a>, as I observed while attending <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2024\/03\/21\/8-big-takeaways-for-free-speech-in-landmark-murthy-v-missouri-censorship-case\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">oral arguments<\/a>, far too many of the justices showed they held a perversely narrow view of the First Amendment, and they gave substantial deference to the feds that had so imperiled it. Some also seemed remarkably ignorant of the expansive factual record supporting the plaintiffs&rsquo; claims.<\/p>\n<p>Last summer, the high court dismissed the plaintiffs&rsquo; concerns and Americans&rsquo; free speech rights on a technicality. In a 6-3 ruling, the Supremes held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to seek injunctive relief, refusing to rule on the merits of the case.<\/p>\n<p>Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/23pdf\/23-411_3dq3.pdf#page=35\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">dissenting opinion<\/a>, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, rebuked the court for straining to create &ldquo;new&rdquo; and &ldquo;heightened&rdquo; standards to find that the plaintiffs lacked standing and warned that the court&rsquo;s refusal to rule on the merits of the case could result in dire consequences.<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;[W]e are obligated to tackle the free speech issue that the case presents,&rdquo; Alito asserted. &ldquo;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.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>The dissent concluded that what transpired in <em>Murthy<\/em> &ldquo;was blatantly unconstitutional, and the country may come to regret the Court&rsquo;s failure to say so.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>By not ruling that the censorship-industrial complex&rsquo;s acts were unconstitutional &mdash; by avoiding the question entirely &mdash; the Supremes signaled that it was open season on free speech in America.<\/p>\n<p>They also gave the green light for the feds to weaponize private sector cutouts to target government dissenters in realms beyond speech.<\/p>\n<p>Why not replicate the censorship-industrial complex&rsquo;s structure and practices to de-bank wrongthinkers, deny them mortgages, or dictate their health insurance options? Why not leverage and perfect the model to impose a total social credit system with American characteristics?<\/p>\n<p>Chief Justice John Roberts&rsquo; <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2025\/01\/09\/supreme-court-chief-roberts-just-defended-the-censorship-industrial-complex\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">year-end report<\/a> for 2024, which indicates that he considers &ldquo;disinformation&rdquo; a key threat to the court and believes there must be widespread national action to combat it, only further augurs poorly for our rights.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, as I recently detailed in a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.realclearinvestigations.com\/articles\/2025\/01\/09\/how_trump_plans_to_take_on_censors_-_and_they_plan_to_take_on_trump_1083366.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">report<\/a> for RealClearInvestigations, the Trump administration&rsquo;s plans to defund and dismantle the censorship-industrial complex and the support of some Republicans in Congress to codify these efforts are critical.<\/p>\n<p>The courts simply cannot be seen as a reliable backstop for protecting our First Amendment rights against the censorship-industrial complex.<\/p>\n<p>What&rsquo;s more, if Republicans allow the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/feds-election-interference-didnt-stop-after-2020\/\" title=\"Feds&#039; Election Interference Didn&#039;t Stop After 2020\">fed-led censorship regime<\/a> to persist, there will be no deterrent to Democrat efforts to create analogous regimes going forward, targeting rights beyond those enshrined in the First Amendment.<\/p>\n<p>Americans may get a reprieve from a government weaponized against political dissenters for the next four, eight, or even 12 years. But to make these changes durable, the Trump administration and Congress must step in and act where the courts are likely to fail us.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>      Ben Weingarten is editor at large for RealClearInvestigations. He is a senior contributor to The Federalist, columnist at Newsweek, and a contributor to the New York Post and Epoch Times, among other publications. Subscribe to his newsletter at weingarten.substack.com, and follow him on Twitter: @bhweingarten.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Zuckerberg admitted Meta&#8217;s role in censorship and vowed to restore free speech<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":698,"featured_media":2393699,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Copy-of-Untitled-2025-01-22T093328.215.png","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[48996,32311,6994,32364,4576],"class_list":["post-2393698","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","tag-federal-censorship","tag-free-speech","tag-scotus","tag-social-media","tag-zuckerberg"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Copy-of-Untitled-2025-01-22T093328.215.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2393698","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/698"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2393698"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2393698\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2393702,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2393698\/revisions\/2393702"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2393699"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2393698"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2393698"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2393698"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}