US Justice Alito Blasts US Government and Facebook “Partnership”—The Government Treats Big Tech “like subordinates”Because They Have “Section 230 and anti-trust in its pocket” [VIDEO]

Today, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Murthy v. Missouri Supreme Court free speech case.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Murthy v. Missouri, which concerns communications between federal government officials and social media companies on their content moderation policies and whether this amounts to government suppression or speech censorship. Missouri, Louisiana, and five individuals filed suit arguing that the federal government violated their First Amendment speech rights by influencing social media companies to censor their posts related to the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 elections.

In a tweet this morning, Senator Rand Paul called the case the most consequential free speech case in U.S. history. He tweeted, “This isn’t just about social media companies; it’s a critical examination of government overreach. The Biden administration and FBI’s efforts to influence Big Tech into silencing dissent tramples on the 1st Amendment. Our focus must be on preventing government censorship, not compelling private entities to act as censors. This case could redefine our free speech.”

Today, SCOTUS heard Murthy v. Missouri, the most consequential free speech case in U.S. history. This isn’t just about social media companies; it’s a critical examination of government overreach. The Biden administration and FBI’s efforts to influence Big Tech into silencing…

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 18, 2024

Earlier today, we shared excerpts from oral arguments made by US Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, whose comments about the First Amendment rocked social media.

“My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways at the most important time. I mean, what would you have the government do? She asked the Lousiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguinaga.

I’ve heard you say a couple of times that the government can post its own speech, but in my hypothetical, you know, kids, this is not safe. Don’t do it is not gonna get it done. So, I guess some might say that the government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country, and you seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government, encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information.”

This is the most horrifying thing I’ve ever heard from a Supreme Court Justice.

Ketanji Brown-Jackson is concerned that the First Amendment is making it harder for the government to censor speech.

That’s literally the entire point.pic.twitter.com/oqBwVZQB0l

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 18, 2024

In one of the most blistering exchanges in today’s oral arguments, US Justice Samuel Alito appeared to be admonishing the federal government for treating social media platforms like their subordinates.”

In his comments, Justice Alito referenced the “exchange between the White House and other federal officials and Facebook in particular, but also some of the other platforms.” He continued, “And I see that, uh, the White House and other federal officials are repeatedly saying that Facebook and the federal government should be partners—we are on the same team —officials are demanding answers—I want an answer—I want it right away! And when they’re unhappy, they curse them out!  There are regular meetings there—and the constant pestering of Facebook and some of the other platforms—and they wanna have regular meetings, and they suggest rules that should be applied—and tell us everything that you do so we can help you, and we can look it over. And I thought, WOW!  I cannot imagine federal officials taking that approach to the print media or representatives over there. If you did that to them, what do you think the reaction would be? And I thought, you know, the only reason why this is taking place is because the federal government has got Section 230 and anti-trust in its pocket. And it’s to mix my metaphors— and it’s got these big clubs available to it. And so it’s treating these platforms like their subordinates. Would you do that to the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or the Associated Press or any other big newspaper or wire service?” he asked US Principal Deputy Solicitor General Brian Fletcher, who was defending the censorship practices of the government and big tech, using the so-called “once in a lifetime pandemic” as an excuse.

Justice Alito: “The government is treating social media platforms like their subordinates.”

You CANNOT outsource censorship and call it constitutional.

You CANNOT have the FBI harassing Facebook and not call it coercion.

You CANNOT suspend the Constitution because you say… pic.twitter.com/wiHD7svIRA

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) March 18, 2024

It should concern everyone how hard the US government is fighting to take away our right to free speech, which is protected by our First Amendment.

Go here to hear the US Supreme Court oral arguments:

The justices have through June 2024 to issue a ruling on this case.