ACLJ Joins Client – Family of School Shooting Survivor – in Condemning Roblox...
Scott Pelley Wasn't a Journalist. He Was a Democratic Operative.
Lefty Bitterly Admits President Trump's Reflecting Pool Looks Good
Despite the 'Wrong and Toxic' Allegations Against Graham Platner, He's Still Ro Khanna's...
Johnathan Turley Weighs In on CA's Election Chaos
Rep. Ro Khanna to Attend Rally Alongside Graham Platner Despite Bombshell NYT Report
This Independence Day, Stand Up for the Most Vulnerable
Iranian Man Admits Smuggling Military Sonar Components to Iran Through China
Susie Wiles, WH Smack Down Fake News Report From the Daily Mail
Santa Monica Man Pleads Guilty to Doxxing ICE Attorney, Urging Others to ‘Swat’...
Democrat Paige Cognetti Abandons City While Police Face Off With Would-Be Killers
Fugitive Who Stole Dead Man’s Identity for 40 Years Pleads Guilty to Federal...
FBI Foils Alleged ISIS-Linked Plot, Arrests Three in Kansas and California
An 'Arctic Frost'-Style Investigation Could Be Prevented With This Bill
Maryland Man Pleads Guilty in $4 Million Tax and COVID Unemployment Fraud Scheme
Tipsheet
Premium

After Disappointing Murthy v. Missouri Ruling, Rand Paul Makes a Suggestion

After Disappointing Murthy v. Missouri Ruling, Rand Paul Makes a Suggestion
Jim Lo Scalzo/Pool via AP

In what’s widely been described as a blow to the First Amendment, the Supreme Court on Wednesday determined in Murthy v. Missouri that a group of social media users and two states—Louisiana and Missouri—lacked standing. The case, which has now been sent back to the lower courts, was about whether the Biden administration illegally coerced social media companies to censor speech it said was misinformation.  

In his dissenting opinion, Justice Samuel Alito said the move “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."

But Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has a solution, which he reminded Americans about on X. 

"Today's SCOTUS decision makes it clear we urgently need to defend our God-given right to free expression," he said. "It's time to fight back and pass my Free Speech Protection Act so the government can no longer cloak itself in secrecy to undermine the First Amendment rights of Americans."

The bill prohibits executive branch employees and contractors from censoring constitutionally protected free speech, imposing "severe penalties" on those who do. 

As part of protecting Americans’ First Amendment rights, the bill would also:

  • Mandate frequent publicly accessible reports from the heads of executive branch agencies detailing the communications between an executive branch agency and Big Tech.

  • Ensure that federal grant money is not misused to label media organizations as sources of misinformation or disinformation.

  • Terminate several programs and authorities that threaten free speech and other constitutionally protected rights. (Judiciary Committee)


“Americans are free people and we do not take infringements upon our liberties lightly," he said at the time. 

“Censorship is a major threat to freedom today," noted Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who introduced companion legislation in the House. "It is clear that Big Government must be more transparent, and that bureaucrats must be held accountable for censorship. The Free Speech Protection Act accomplishes that and gives individuals remedies for censorship to protect vital First Amendment freedoms."


Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement