The federal ruling means a Supreme Court showdown on Big Tech censorship.

Date:

Share post:

[ad_1]

An astonishing 99% of political contributors on Twitter give to Democrats. Facebook and Alphabet (Google’s parent company) are nearly all in the mix, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

Trusting these left-leaning tech platforms has always been naive. But the latest evidence — email correspondence between Big Tech executives and some 45 Biden administration officials — suggests a greater risk than Silicon Valley bias. The government is calling exactly what is to be censored. The US Constitution forbids the government from censorship, so the group decided to let Biden’s Silicon Valley do the dirty work.

The complicity between the Biden administration and Big Tech should frighten all Americans. Like a vise with a tight grip, he crushes freedom. That makes growth in Big Tech even more urgent. On Friday, the opportunity arrived.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the idea that “corporations have the right to censor what people say.” A federal court has upheld a Texas law barring social media companies from removing posts based on political views.

For two decades, tech giants have had the constitutional right to remove anything and anyone from their platforms. The Court of Appeal said no.

The social media giants are appealing their decision to the US Supreme Court. Justice Samuel Alito said the case “clearly deserves to be heard by this court.”

Judge Clarence Thomas
Justice Clarence Thomas proposed that social media platforms should be regulated as common service providers or public utilities.
AFP via Getty Images

Get ready for a Supreme Court showdown with Justice Clarence Thomas, leading the effort to validate Silicon Valley power. In April 2021, Thomas lamented that “too much speech is being held in the hands of a few private parties.” Rather than waiting for Congress to fix it, Thomas said, the court should develop a solution as soon as a case comes up. That time has come.

Thomas proposed that social media platforms be regulated as common service providers or public utilities. AT&T cannot refuse to open a phone account because of your political views. Your local electric company can’t pick and choose its customers, and neither can Amtrak.

In the year In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled in Pruneyard Mall v. Robins ruled that California could force a mall owner to open its premises to political protesters handing out leaflets. California requires that the mall be open to all speakers. Malls were the public squares of the 1980s. Digital platforms are the public squares of the 21st century.

They should not be slaves to the government. Thanks to the indictments of Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry against top Biden officials, we have proof it’s happening. Citing frequent email exchanges between these officials and Big Tech employees, Schmidt and Landry warn of a “vast and pervasive federal ‘censorship enterprise'” and say the Biden administration has “collaborated with social media companies to censor free speech.”

More revelations to come. On September 6, a federal court ordered Dr. Anthony Fauci and White House Press Secretary Karin Jean-Pierre to turn over their email exchanges with Big Tech to the Missouri AG.

The Biden administration says he’s fighting to protect democracy. But Big Tech’s efforts to use censorship to silence political opponents prove the hypocrisy of that claim. Keeping social media platforms open to all viewpoints is critical to democracy.

Joe Biden
The Biden administration has “collaborated with social media companies to censor free speech.”
REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

It is also important for the free exchange of scientific ideas. Big Tech has willingly complied with the Biden team’s attempt to clear up scientific disagreements about how to handle Covid. Scientists who disagreed with the party line on lockdowns, masks, school closures and the origin of the virus were banned. The result was a ridiculous scientific consensus and many costly mistakes.

In September 2021, when Kentucky Senator Rand Paul (a physician) posted a YouTube video reporting the ineffectiveness of cloth masks, Paul accused social media of being an arm of the federal government. ABC News dismissed Paul’s allegation as “baseless.”

Now we have the proof.

Fortunately, Friday’s appeals court decision puts the Supreme Court on course to check social media’s unlimited and increasingly dangerous power of censorship.

just in time. Democracy and free scientific inquiry will be safe for him.

Betsy McCaughey is the former lieutenant governor of New York.

Twitter: @Betsy_McCaughey

[ad_2]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

spot_img

Related articles

Formula 1 Season Kicks Off: Hamilton Joins Ferrari, McLaren Defends Title Across 24 Races

Formula 1 Season Kicks Off: Hamilton Joins Ferrari, McLaren Defends Title Across 24 Races The 2025 Formula 1 season...

Scientists Unveil Simple and Enjoyable Method to Reduce Diabetes Risk

Scientists Unveil Simple and Enjoyable Method to Reduce Diabetes Risk A groundbreaking study has revealed that a simple and...

Amazon and Flipkart Warehouse Raids Expose Major Source of Non-Certified Products

Amazon and Flipkart Warehouse Raids Expose Major Source of Non-Certified Products Recent raids on Amazon and Flipkart warehouses by...

Agoda Unveils Budget-Friendly Spring Destinations: Tirupati Shines as India’s Sole Entry

Agoda, the popular online travel platform, has released its list of the most budget-friendly spring destinations in Asia,...