Government Must Turn Over More Evidence in Gov-Big Tech Collusion Lawsuit

The Biden administration must turn over more evidence in the Missouri v Biden case, a case where the current regime is being sued for using government to illegally collude with Big Tech to censor Americans that don’t align with the Democratic Party’s narratives.

The lawsuit was brought by numerous plaintiffs that are represented in part by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA). The lawsuit alleges there was an extensive network of censorship enforced by over a dozen agencies and more than 100 government officials. The agencies reported directly back to the White House, who managed the censorship efforts, unpersoning people that spoke against their narratives on issues such as the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine and election fraud.

Judge allows more evidence discovery in Biden-Big Tech collusion lawsuit– www.lifesitenews.com
Source Link
Excerpt:

(Reclaim The Net) — The Western District of Louisiana’s U.S. District Court has ruled in favor of the State of Missouri, allowing additional discovery in the significant Missouri v. Biden lawsuit, which scrutinizes government collaboration in social media censorship. This decision comes after the Supreme Court, in June, overturned a prior injunction, then-named Murthy v. Missouri, which had prohibited entities including the White House, CDC, FBI, CISA, and the Surgeon General’s office from pressing social media platforms to suppress speech protected under the Constitution.

We obtained a copy of the order for you here.

Two leading epidemiologists also represented by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) are among the clients who claim to have been targeted in a wide-ranging censorship campaign, allegedly coordinated by multiple government bodies. The plaintiffs in the case—Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff, Aaron Kheriaty, and Ms. Jill Hines were ruled by the Supreme Court as lacking sufficient standing.

Initial findings from the limited discovery available at the preliminary injunction stage revealed an extensive network of censorship involving more than a dozen agencies and over a hundred government officials, possibly implicating many more yet uncovered. These agencies were reportedly directed by the White House to manipulate social media content, particularly contradicting the federal government’s stances on issues from COVID-19 to electoral processes.

The depth of the Biden Administration’s involvement in these censorial activities likely would have remained hidden without this lawsuit. Although the merits of the case were not evaluated by the Supreme Court’s majority, Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch did comment on the Plaintiffs’ claims, finding the government’s actions to be a breach of the First Amendment.

With the district court’s recent decision to expand discovery, the NCLA’s clients are positioned to demonstrate the necessary standing to meet the Supreme Court’s criteria and potentially succeed in their claims.

“We now consistently proceed — burdened by what has been,” wrote U.S. District Judge Terry A. Doughty, seemingly referencing a quote from unsuccessful Presidential candidate and current Vice President Kamala Harris.