The federal appellate court found that the Biden White House, the FBI, the Surgeon General, and the CDC did violate the 1st amendment of the Constitution
On September 8th, the 5th Circuit federal appellate court finally ruled on the lawsuits against Joe Biden and his administration which started over a year ago. Back on July 4th, federal Circuit court Judge Terry Doughty cast the first decision in the case, finding what he claimed to be the most egregious violation of the First Amendment he had ever seen.
In response to that finding, Doughty imposed a total of ten super-stringent restrictions on the White House as well as a huge chunk of the rest of the federal government, including the Surgeon General, the FBI, the CDC, and several other agencies like the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security.
While the issues these allegations assert certainly have the capacity to be major violations of our Constitution’s First Amendment, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, while generally affirming Doughty’s earlier ruling, did reign back the breadth and scope of the lower court’s restrictions.
Here is the entire 74-page decision the Court issued on Friday.
In general, the court found that the actions of the White House, FBI, Surgeon General, and the CDC specifically, likely violated the First Amendment by putting pressure on social-media companies to remove content that it regarded as misinformation – not so coincidentally, this was also content that directly challenged the assertions being publicly disseminated as facts by those same agencies.
The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is headquartered in New Orleans, Louisiana. It responded to a case initially brought by the Attorneys General of Missouri and Louisiana, along with a conservative website owner and several individuals who opposed President Biden’s COVID-19 policies.
After the decision was made public, a White House spokesperson released the following press statement:
“The DOJ [Department of Justice] is reviewing the court’s decision and will evaluate its options in this case. This Administration has promoted responsible actions to protect public health, safety, and security when confronted by challenges like a deadly pandemic and foreign attacks on our elections.
“Our consistent view remains that social-media platforms have a critical responsibility to take account of the effects their platforms are having on the American people, but make independent choices about the information they present,” the spokesperson added.
Most Americans who don’t share the liberal ideology or political agenda have long argued their views are being censored by major social media companies, as well as in academia and across America’s far-left-leaning media in general.
In a public statement issued on September 5th, Arizona Republican Kari Lake said that Google has “a much bigger ability to decide who is running our country… than we the people.”
Liberals in turn have accused Republicans of undermining free speech. They point to the removal of some books concerning race and LGBTQ+ issues from school libraries in several GOP-controlled states and bans on the teaching of critical race theory.
As part of the written opinion issued with the ruling, which largely affirmed the original decision from the circuit court, the three judges opined:
“Ultimately, we find the district court did not err in determining that several officials—namely the White House, the Surgeon General, the CDC [federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], and the FBI—likely coerced or significantly encouraged social-media platforms to moderate content, rendering those decisions state actions. In doing so, the officials likely violated the First Amendment.”
Some of the biggest issues that prompted the allegations and subsequent filing of the lawsuit centered around the belief that the federal government was pressuring social media companies to remove or drastically reduce the circulation of content being shared across the internet regarding the Wuhan lab leak theory for the origins of coronavirus; the effectiveness of vaccines; the minimalization of potential side effects from vaccines and boosters, and the content on Hunter Biden’s laptop.
Radio host Clay Travis wrote that the verdict “may well be the most consequential First Amendment case of the 21st century” in a post on the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter.
Travis then added:
“If the government in power can restrict what opinions you can share then we no longer have a First Amendment, meaning we no longer have a free country. What Joe Biden’s administration did is the biggest governmental attack on the First Amendment in any of our lives.”
Fox News star Jesse Watters also took to X:
“A bombshell ruling by the 5th circuit court today, finding the Biden White House, the FBI, and the CDC violated the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans…”
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, whose state was one of the original bringers of the lawsuit, simply commented on X:
“The First Amendment remains intact.”
Republican Sen. Rand Paul welcomed the ruling and called for stricter legislation protecting free speech. He posted:
“Americans don’t take infringements on their liberty lightly. Under my Free Speech Protection Act the government will no longer be able to cloak itself in secrecy to undermine the First Amendment.”
The verdict was also celebrated by the New Civil Liberties Alliance, a nonprofit that says it is committed to protecting constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State.
The alliance wrote:
“Big victory! The Fifth Circuit today has vindicated NCLA’s clients who—like far too many Americans—have been victims of the unlawful federal censorship enterprise.”
At present, it is unclear how the White House or any of the other now permanently restricted agencies will respond to the ruling. So far, the only statement any of the principles has made claims they are reviewing their options.”
The fact that they are even considering challenging this decision, should tell you everything you need to know about the priorities, focus, and agenda of this administration, the party that supports it, and the class and character of the people who support and vote for them.
Be sure to tune in to The Veracity Report Podcast, our first episode after an almost 3-year hiatus, where I discuss this case in detail. Also, be sure to join our Facebook discussion Group @ facebook.com/groups/veracityreport and follow us on X @VeracityReport1. You can also follow my 2 personal accounts now that my original is no longer banned on X @ArmyMajKurtD and @KurtDillon_com. You can also always reach out at www.veracityreport.org and www.theveritas7.com.
That reminds me, if you enjoy true crime, you want to check out my new very in-depth true crime podcast, The Veritas 7. You can find all of our podcasts on our websites or wherever you get your podcasts, we’re on pretty much every platform except possibly a few of the obscure ones.
Lastly, I have to remind all of our faithful readers and listeners that truly independent media such as we are, requires contributions from the people who receive value from what we provide. Sadly, we don’t have the deep pockets that fascist liberal billionaire media moguls do, so we must continuously ask for your help. If it’s at all possible, please visit www.patreon.com/veracityreport to help. Even if you can only contribute as little as $1.00 per month (our lowest recurring their of support), we would appreciate it and thank you kindly for it. That’s because 20 or 25,000 $1.00’s per month goes a long way toward supporting our mission to continue bringing you completely fact-based, unbiased investigative journalism — and we have a LOT more followers, readers, and listeners than that. So PLEASE help keep us funded if you can. Thank you!