JUST IN: Supreme Court Hears Case On Biden Administration's Pressuring Of Social Media Platforms

On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Murthy v. Missouri about the Biden Administration's alleged pressuring of social media platforms to remove specific content.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
account.forbes...
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: / forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: / forbes
More From Forbes: forbes.com

[@halas7388]

WHEN THE GOVERNMENT IS ALLOWED SPECIAL EMERGENCY POWERS, THEY WILL CREATE AN ENDLESS AMOUNT OF EMERGENCIES.

[@RuralRedRebel]

Try telling that to a democrat.... They're thankful the government is there to save them from all of the emergencies. 🐑

[@STEADFAST__and__LOYAL__M1059]

Zuckerberg should be on trial

[@marydiaz2763]

He is to busy bunker so he knows something is about to happen. Wish we could have him jailed right away.

[@michaelcerda5514]

The Cia paid for that information 😅😅

[@rlwetz4317]

"pressuring" = censoring

[@neoncat9573]

"compelling interest"

[@graceoverall]

So is "requesting." Am I being unfair in thinking that some of these justices are significantly less intelligent than our founders!? Censorship of ANY kind from ANY public servant is UNACCEPTABLE!!! This is a slippery slope.

[@philliphols]

Would be nice to see one or two of these social media companies voluntarily provide their contacts with government entities. Text, emails, call transcripts, etc

[@annakingry9157]

Look them up under the people involved or the investigation. Not everything is on "once over very lightly" media shows.

[@rainewaters6371]

Perhaps someone should leak that information, seriously.

[@ulehlud9027]

When the government and law enforcement talk, it isn't just making a suggestion, especially when it comes with threats of reforming laws that would negatively affect the platforms. This gov lawyer makes me want to scream. Goodbye freedom, if the gov wins.

[@brachiator1]

The people have a right to be stupid. The people have a right to be misinformed. As Orwell wrote in the novel "1984," Ignorance is Strength.

[@justinfleming5119]

Do they even do "McCarthyism" propaganda in schools now? When I was in school, the Cold War was still ongoing, Reagan-Bush was in the White House and my teachers did a module every semester on how censorship of leftwing political speech was the worst thing ever and marked the 50s as the most unfree era of American public life in the history of Democracy. I can't imagine how they could square that moral teaching with the current zeitgeist without causing students to ask the "wrong" questions about the dissonance.

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

I even got censored and shadow banned on youtube 2 years ago for speaking out against "Illegal Immigration".

[@annakingry9157]

Probably because you didn't know what it was.

[@allster0crowly]

@@annakingry9157 stop baiting key words cause the entire comment to be shadow banned, and the program to watch what the person says to more effectively ban them and thier comments.

[@trumanhw]

They constantly delete our comments Whenever your comment isn't duplicated (top and in the body) it doesn't exist

[@neoncat9573]

That is atrocious because look at us now., we are inundated with illegal immigration to the point of losing our country! There should be no slippery slope. There should be no censorship of speech.

[@neoncat9573]

That's atrocious, not to mention that you had a good point. Look at us now! We are inundated with illegal immigration to the point of losing our country, and in some cases our lives.

[@tyronhartley33]

We got to get more active as citizens

[@garenmcvay2695]

How can these people cry about speech, when they are the ones who say what ever they feel like, then threaten others for using their freedom to speak. They want a one sided free speech, where only they can speak.

[@harveywilkinson2432]

The tech companies are private entities with private ownership who also have free speech rights. The government should not be able to force them to use their platforms to post anything.

[@Randy-md6xl]

​@@harveywilkinson2432it's treason for the government to use censorship against the American citizens or persuade someone else to do it for them.

[@justinfleming5119]

It's not clear who you have posed as "these people".

[@justinfleming5119]

@@harveywilkinson2432 Suddenly corporations are people for the purpose of suppressing speech.

[@neoncat9573]

​@@harveywilkinson2432 This government has been trying to usher in the loss of free speech.

[@halas7388]

I am getting sick and tired of these employees calling themselves, "The Government." We are the government and the laws prevent you from bossing us around. Politicians and the, "Government" have been caught in so many lies that anything they say should be scrutinized.

[@annakingry9157]

We are not the "government" individually any more than I own Safeway when I buy groceries there.

[@halas7388]

@@annakingry9157 I suppose you think that is witty. You may have a point, but collectively if everyone stopped going to Safeway they would be out of business.

[@inktray4913]

Ive been censored repeatedly for simply telling truths

[@SwiftD6]

Same, FJB and youtube too, the democrats must never be allowed back in.

[@bjarkiengelsson]

YOU WERE C3NSORED FOR LYING. Get it through your head

[@SonTerrific]

@@bjarkiengelssonif that was true, we wouldn’t have any msm channels.

[@bjarkiengelsson]

@SonTerrific Too bad you can't disprove anything theg say then?

[@1Minioner]

@@SonTerrific Do you even know what you're saying? Do you understand the difference between the law and a private company's terms of use? It's not illegal to lie, but any private company can make it against their terms to lie on their platform. Media can do whatever they want on their own platforms. You, as a user of a platform, are bound by the terms of use by the owner and operator of that platform. But this isn't about lying, it's about sharing information with medical or other similarly impactful types of information without scientific backing or consensus. If a person posts something encouraging people to do something relating to their health that has no scientific backing at all, the operator of that platform has an interest in censoring that information, in an effort to reduce their liability (IE to not get sued) for potential deaths or illnesses caused by the post. This shit is not complex or difficult to grasp. It blows my mind that conservatives, after having this explained to them over, and over, and over again over the course of several years, still do not understand this concept. I can't believe you are allowed to vote when your brain functions at this level. We may as well allow middle schoolers to vote when millions of people who will nod their heads at this statement are voting for the future leaders of our country. Our education system has failed us.

[@augustrush7538]

“Persuading”, - Federal incarceration should not be used as a persuasion. That would be simply ‘Entrapment’. (Which should be punishable by federal law.). Political targeting should not be tolerated.

[@lifesajoke6965]

A "once in a lifetime pandemic" does not give the government any extra power over peoples freedom of speech. No one's trying to stop them from stating that Russian interference won Trump the election, even though they still cant produce any actual evidence of that being the case.

[@annakingry9157]

Mueller's investigation arrested a number of Russians and Americans for just that . Except for Americans' short attention span, there would have been more. The lack of standards is bringing the US down.

[@lifesajoke6965]

@@annakingry9157 Arrests and indictments are not proof of anything.

[@trumanhw]

The plaintiff never pointed out that the gov already has MSNBS, the Compost, the Slimes, Pure BullShit ... etc. It's almost as if these idiots don't realize that they're advocating (and the JUSTICES literally advocated here) to ignore the constitution; when it's THEIR entire purpose for existing: To PROTECT the constitution. Disgusting!

[@marcusmason1168]

They played nice with the first lawyer👀.. They attacked the lawyer representing free speech!! This is terrible!

[@neoncat9573]

Absolutely they did! I am as alarmed as you are. And in addition they have taken down my comment that I posted maybe 15 times supporting someone's comment who wrote against illegal immigration. So now we can't write against something that is against the law? This is becoming too convoluted!

[@thomaspruchinski385]

He did a horrible job. Instead of arguing “the government does have the right to encourage platforms to take down some speech, but in this case they went far beyond that” he argued “the government never has the right to encourage platforms to take down speech.” He was unfortunately a bad defender of free speech

[@rfahy72]

All government censorship should be banned, removed, and not allowed in any way!

[@lockwoodpeckinpaugh9252]

Including the Red State book bans.

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

@@lockwoodpeckinpaugh9252 Pornographic books shouldn't be allowed in Classrooms or the Public Library.

[@jenalatz3589]

​@@lockwoodpeckinpaugh9252right and Dr.Suess, To kill a Mockingbird, Gone with the Wind and the Bible can be put back on the shelves too.

[@666size666]

@@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_ They never were. Nice try.

[@TheDragonageorigins]

​@lockwoodpeckinpaugh9252 pretty sure "All" means everything

[@saveamericanfreedom2400]

Nobody has been banning books either we're just asking for a rating scale so that children do not see obscene things.

[@northwestgardener5076]

Huckleberry Finn, Tom Sawyer. Ring any bells? They have definitely already banned books.

[@defeatingdefeaters]

Knowledge claims should be accessible by anyone, at all times and should be open to scrutiny. The alternative leads to tyranny.

[@annakingry9157]

They are. Freedom of Information Act. Name any subject.

[@rainewaters6371]

​@@annakingry9157 --- Social media platforms and/or the government can and it seems has restricted freedom of speech. That is the point of this case. When or should this be allowed?

[@GScully42]

People are tired of their comments being deleted or suppressed when we want to have a good debate about 'sensitive' subjects.

[@ricinro]

Then quit these corporate run SM sites. The only state censorship today is book banning in schools and "anti-woke" legislation.

[@rlwetz4317]

KZbin is deleting comments for our protection! Their mods are heroes! Disagreement is hate! Criticism is a danger to our democracy!

[@charlesbrightman4237]

Agreed. And that even applies to comments made here on public comment areas on YT.

[@richardbryanesq]

That's not what this case is about, but okay.

[@nomnomyam9379]

@@richardbryanesq so surgeon general telling tech companies to censor true info about v injury is not part of this case?

[@xxcelr8rs]

Allito gets it.

[@user-gf3lw5pi4t]

Fascista the blending of private business and the government the DC government has gone all the way 😢

[@justinfleming5119]

Fascism is when that relationship is explicit and held accountable to the people of the nation. Such partnerships have always existed under all systems. Under Liberalism, these relationships operate under a pall of hypocrisy and denial.

[@michaelmashburn6068]

This is a slippery slope

[@justinfleming5119]

There are no slippery slopes. There are malevolent actors pushing things off a cliff on purpose.

[@neoncat9573]

You are right. They play dumb and get into hours' long debate about "do we really have a right to free speech?' Well, our Constitution says we do, and I believe our Constitution.

[@neoncat9573]

They play dumb and get into hours' long debate about "do we really have a right to free speech?' Well, our Constitution says we do, and I believe our Constitution

[@wmatay1]

The phrase taxation without representation describes a populace that is required to pay taxes to a government authority without having any say in that government's policies. The term has its origin in a slogan of the American colonials against their British rulers: "Taxation without representation is tyranny." Deus Lo Vult 🔥🙏⚔️🛡✝️🇬🇪🏴⛪️

[@jeff3olsen]

Truly atrocious to hear the justices trampling the 1st amendment under their feet. I pray justice & truth will be upheld. 🙏

[@Jason-TheChad-Muska_circa1995]

It won't be. It will be a 5-4 decision in favor of the government. Liberal Republican Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts will be the ones who defect as per usual.

[@p.o.4339]

ANYONE who thinks that government "requests" aren't coercion needs to be sent to a re-education center. Watch what happens to you if you ignore or deny the requests. Don't listen to that fool.

[@lindanelson6643]

I'm sick of being censored!

[@av2245]

Technically, private companies can censor you... they have that right. What cannot happen is censorship at the behest of the government. That is 100% illegal.

[@jonimartin5961]

Threatening to withhold reimbursement unless you are compliant with the vaccine program….sounds coercive to me.

[@jenalatz3589]

And so should additional reimbursement for marking deaths as by covid instead if with covid.

[@kamihofstee1049]

This is insane!!!!!

[@justsumname]

Does a small privately owned bakery get to choose who it accepts as customers and what cakes are baked or how to decorate them?

[@pisceananarchyvortex7223]

As an artist, nobody better tell me how to decorate anything

[@Jason-TheChad-Muska_circa1995]

Nah nah nah. That's different duh 😂

[@USGovsOwnersRtheRealEnemy]

You tube loves my handle and proves it religiously by deleting my perfectly legal comments.

[@useurheadsformorethanahatrack]

If you've been censored.... Say it here! ✋I have!

[@user-vq6xk8fe3j]

Same here. Lots of experiences

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

I got Censored, Shadow Banned, Slandered etc. It wasn't like this before 2008. There was no Censorship on KZbin before the year 2008.

[@matthewballon7553]

Me

[@chadgarcia983]

I used to threaten Chinese diplomats on twitter. Elson Musk has not reinstated my account despite his claims to free speech.

[@allancresswell7356]

I have

[@saveamericanfreedom2400]

Quit treating people like their stupid. Free speech is necessary in a free country. Let us make up our own minds we do have one.

[@radfield6089]

So it’s not coercion if you wink and nod to a third party to do it for you in exchange for a relationship…..

[@Donna-vk7xq]

All states should sue,

[@GayleThornberry]

Freedom of speech rights under the law constitution freedom of speech

[@debbiemurphy4813]

Not by a private company. They decide.

[@TheDragonageorigins]

​@debbiemurphy4813 except when public companies make exceptions and only enforce rules on specific people, then that whole excuse doesnt work

[@oldschoolzone5711]

@@debbiemurphy4813 They're Not "private companies" when they're Paid and do the bidding of the Government. It's amazing what you people will just flat out Lie about, as if being Dishonest is a way to convince people.

[@davidlangford9107]

ON TOP OF THAT, THESE PRIVATE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES HAVE OPENED THEMSELVES AS “PUBLIC FORUMS AND PUBLIC PLATFORMS” WHERE “FREE” NO COSTS SUBSCRIBERS CAN “FREELY” SPEAK AND WERE GIVEN SECTION 230 FOR PROTECTION FROM SPEECH THAT MAY GO FAR BEYOND THE FIRST AMENDMENT TENANTS!

[@AJ-ii6fu]

@@oldschoolzone5711SpaceX takes on government bids. Are they not a private company? Of course they are. Also, what social media company was paid to do the government’s bidding? Seems like a wild accusation on your part.

[@msgwen2u]

Trying to censor TRUTH ! That's what this is all about !

[@trufflesrheaven]

If you follow each platform’s guidelines, you won’t have a comment deleted. I’ve had my comments deleted. I’ve even been suspended temporarily from some platforms. No one is out to get you. Follow the rules. Kapeesh?

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

@@trufflesrheaven Social Media isn't above the Constitution. It isn't above the Law either.

[@user-kw7zf9xx3k]

FJB AND HIS ADMINISTRATION

[@SwiftD6]

Amen

[@debbiemurphy4813]

Lmbo! 😅

[@12Nordsee]

FDJT and u too

[@debbiemurphy4813]

Trump is gone. Hopefully on his way to prison.

[@davemurray2880]

​@12Nordsee ☝️🤡

[@eddieb5149]

Waiting for another round of meltdowns and rants from democrats about how the supreme court should be disolved.

[@rainewaters6371]

The point: 'WHO' has the RIGHT to say what is 'truth' and/or what is good, appropriate, and accurate information? That is the right of every human being to read, study, and search out that truth for themselves - this cannot happen with 'any' restrictions on our freedoms of research, speech, and especially that important freedom of our ability to exchange ideas and information. It is NOT the right of any government OR social media platform to restrict, manipulate, alter, or make judgements on my interpretations of ideas/opinions, and/or my freedom of speech whether in writing or actual verbal exchange. --- We need LAWS that actually safe guard minors, adult individuals, and small businesses, from any harm like sexual explotation, libel, slander, and/or any kind of coersion, threat, and unlawful restrictions of our speech by our government, any department or individual within our government, or the temporary, adverse manipulation of our laws and Constitution by our government. In other words, unless I am truly breaking an actual unmanipulated law on the books, LEAVE ME ALONE! 🗽🇺🇸👍

[@YellowRose3332]

Rainewaters you should have been speaker to Supreme Court; to me you covered everything Exactly without chasing your tail like a dog, that’s not making your point.. bottom line is truth and false, one side censoring truth; and pushing false on the people. 3-22-24 my opinion

[@davidlangford9107]

WHERE THE GOVERNMENT ARGUMENT FLAMED OUT WAS THE “REASONABLY PRUDENT PERSON STANDARD” IN REGARD TO GOVERNMENT SPEECH ESTABLISHED A REASONABLE PERSON IN THE PUBLIC AND NOT A REASONABLE PERSON WHO WORKS FOR THE GOVERNMENT!

[@mr.perfect1er]

They were having BUSINESS MEETINGS and CONSPIRING not simply trying to innocently persuade

[@twhite8308]

The rudeness of the justices is unprofessional. It undermines their credibility.

[@AntonioRomero-te4cb]

All traitors and law breakers belong in a federal prison

[@SeasideWitcher]

And cemeteries , where , ironically , they can still vote Democrat.

[@AntonioRomero-te4cb]

@@SeasideWitcher 😂😂😂

[@Clonetrooper1139]

​@SeasideWitcher Interesting that all the voters fraud cases have been Republicans.

[@partyboat123]

USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA

[@12Nordsee]

sorry u are so insane

[@trufflesrheaven]

President Biden will win. USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!

[@partyboat123]

@@12Nordsee if you were truly sorry you would not have said it in the first place

[@12Nordsee]

@@partyboat123 PISS ANT

[@L4J34n]

WE LIVE IN A FASCIST GOVERNMENT RUN SOCIETY BOTH SIDES OF THE SPECTRUM CENSOR THINGS ITS NOT THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS THEY ARE ONE IN THE SAME WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE ONLY ONES TTO CHANGE THAT WE GOTTA COMETOGETHER AND STAND UP AS A COUNTRY

[@Donna-vk7xq]

Can't keep bailing out this administration,hie speaks bs

[@halas7388]

If someone commits a crime because of something someone says, they are guilty of the crime. Not the person that said it. That is like saying the gun pulled the trigger.

[@TheGoldenFluff]

☝️ somebody gets it

[@Donna-vk7xq]

Yes,they still cecore all

[@Donna-vk7xq]

U all have censored anything that wasn't good Biden,u cencerd me, their quilty except trump,

[@user-jt7sb9tw2g]

BULLSHIT 🔥

[@Geewasright]

I absolutely believe the person who made this comment is a Trump supporter. No doubt.

[@Calbeck]

Listening to Jackson trying to find excuses for government to conduct censorship is disgusting.

[@stevenewman1393]

A very big thumbs up to the Supreme Court Justices for standing strong and firm and for fighting the good fight and for truthfully and honestly telling it as it truly is and as it truly is not indeed!👌.

[@billybcgn25]

SCOTUS doesn't seem to realize that the whole jab issue was that there were renowned medical personnel who disagreed with the jab; further, they offered that there were other potential remedies that needed to be pursued. However, a very small number of principals in the federal government coerced the social media platforms to suppress those individual health care providers' speech. Consequently, those ideas, and the people who tried to field those ideas, were censored. Yet now, the same--the very SAME--government agencies which pressured--and collaborated with--social media to censor those providers, now acknowledge the very same things *THEY* were advocating, regarding the Wuhan Flu virus. Things like the masking of children, jabbing children, alternative treatment protocols... Meanwhile, too many of the justices were frittering away the time in flights of hypothetical fancies of silly words. It seems SCOTUS was demanding bayonets and guillotines with heads rolling into buckets before "harm" was done. They demanded to see John the Baptist's head on a silver platter before recognizing that yes, the government suppressed speech by proxy.

[@apexkingflow6462]

I've had my whole account deleted because of the comment section. Someone would come say something stupid and id roast they ass then my comment would get taken down while the person that started with me has their comments stay up. It's unfair

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

That is exactly what I saw here. They show up talking trash and when you reply back, your comments get censored. I wonder who these weak puppets are.

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

One showed up with the name mohammed aslam, talked a lot of violent crap and when I replied back, my comments got censored. That's when I realized he's either working for youtube or for the Government. So there are extremists within the Government.

[@apexkingflow6462]

@@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_ EXACTLY, cause I can give them something to censor.

[@elmabrooks7417]

I have been punished for saying what I think about what is happening in Palestine with the support of my government and our powerful military. How come I cannot say what I think about the participation of my government and how it uses our military in the killing of the Palestinians. The government used to tell we the people what our military was going to do. That was to have support from We the People. The government does not tell us now why our powerful military is in the Red Sea. Some of our Military men were killed and we know not why? They do not care now, if we the People do not support what ever they make our powerful military do. We the people want to know how those deaths of our military occurred in the Red Sea. Why was our military in the Red Sea? The Families of those killed may sue. It hard to lose our loved ones with no reason given by our government. KZbin, This may or may not go through

[@John-yh8oe]

Me to utube Democrat ran

[@elmabrooks7417]

@@John-yh8oe I never give up. I try to get my views across.

[@TheGoldenFluff]

​@elmabrooks7417 they want us to roll over & close our eyes again! that way they can continue to run rampant #FJBOLGB

[@HMM-be7tj]

​@@John-yh8oe You're mind is simple.

[@lawilson674]

Crooked & Treasonous

[@samueldelaney385]

The content of a person’s speech is always protected by the First Amendment. The federal government is prohibited from censoring speech that is protected by the Constitution. Federal government officials are guilty of coercing social media companies into violating the First Amendment rights of the American People.

[@magnificantmoongod1414]

I don't agree that America needs to be Orwellian.

[@justsumname]

Listening to this. Sotamayer is stubbornly refusing to hear the man's evidence and points. Weird and dumb.

[@Royshanger]

When a certain entity is all-powerful compared to the other one, a suggestion is coercion.

[@janbrittingham9648]

Unfortunately, technology has taken off at warp speed before and we’re left with rights vs. responsibilities.

[@txnetcop]

Remove Biden and imprison the fool!

[@FuHackers-wx9lq]

I'm so glad the courts are so hard at work... HEARING BS! 🇺🇸 first, right?

[@stevedriscoll2539]

The first Amendment says Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech ....seems straight forward, but lawyers and judges can muddy the waters and twist everything. George Washington was so relieved to leave the capital which he said was basically a den of vipers, referring to all the lawyers...a pre-apology for any lawyer with true integrity but I think they are the exception rather than the rule.

[@eddieklotz9966]

FJB

[@12Nordsee]

FDJT and u too

[@davemurray2880]

​@@12Nordsee ☝️🤡

[@grousejr]

What a waste of time.

[@jonirvine3787]

Let’s ask a bunch of senior citizens to decide a question about social media 😂

[@mommamomma3607]

Fjb. And his whole administration and all those that voted for him. Trump 2024🇺🇲

[@SwiftD6]

Trump or RFK, the only sane options.

[@Barskor1]

Every business operates at the discresion of the gubberment so when the gubberment that can shut you down says hey we don't like this or that guess what happens? We know what happens because it already happened and likely is still happening.

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

That's what happens in places like Russia, China, North Korea, Iran etc.

[@SwiftD6]

Funny thing is that Putin actually wanted Biden, yet Pelosi spread that fake news too. It's time all these cancerous growths get dealt with.

[@Barskor1]

@@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_ Look up the USA's CIA project Mockingbird it started with the Cold War

[@TheGoldenFluff]

​@@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_& right here in the U.S. too #FJBOLGB

[@ChaseX09]

You ask Americans! I want to say 80% of Americans on these platforms would complain behind those five!

[@dessatt]

Omg! I woke up to this, but... am i the only one noticing that every time they dont want you to say ghe thing... they cut you off or talk over you so you dont say it? They ask a question, then dont wait for the snswer because they cut you off. Id wait and thrn ask... are you done? Are you done? Because i wont want the beginning of your sentence tl be interrupted by the middle of mine. You asked a question, allow me to answer it, what are we two?? Ugh!

[@clintonkeilitz2549]

Obiden admin

[@williamrosales5718]

Its not coercion if the governments "criticism" is self serving, not we the people serving.

[@ronniesearcy6602]

BIDEN, HARRIS, SCHUMER, SCHIFF, PELOSI, JEFFRIES ALL NEED TO GO

[@Chrissy45999]

The government attorney's whole argument is based upon the assumption that when an emergency like the pandemic happens, the government alone uniquely possesses the correct information and remedy, which justifies its "partnership" with media. I think that narrative was shattered by our experience with the last pandemic.

[@lauragoin1227]

People are so intiteled they cant see the forest through the trees.

[@lynwill9946]

Why is congress banning TikTok?

[@GScully42]

Too many young people seeing the BS from the media also it's a threat to Facebook and Googles profits.

[@chrishackett554]

Because it has a trap door built into the app that the Chinese government can see, hear and read all your activity to be used against the USA in the future and also can shut down your smart device in the event of hostilities between the USA and communist China.

[@mandywatson.]

More censorship. So far, the bill hasn't passed in the Senate though

[@justinfleming5119]

Because a certain, privileged tribe which controlls virtually all media doesn't have control over TikTok. This is causing them problems right now because users on TikTok can share information and analysis of the Israel-Gaza war that would be censored on competing platforms. So they want the government to sieze TikTok from its Chinese owners and "sell" it to one of their own.

[@robmarvinmd376]

Because TikTok, a Chinese based company, is supported by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party); apart from the CCP actively utilizing the platform to promulgate dis-and mis-information globally, TikTok should be banned, at a minimum, given the CCP’s active persecution, imprisonment, and genocide of its Muslim citizens.

[@charlesbrightman4237]

"IF" American citizens do not like it that Americans have 'free speech', then Amend the US Constitution to say so. Otherwise, the US Constitution is the highest law here in America that politicians and the US military swears an oath to uphold and defend.

[@mr.perfect1er]

God is the highest Law! Our Rights come from being made in God's image...period

[@charlesbrightman4237]

@@mr.perfect1er God does not actually exist except for as a concept alone...period.

[@charlesbrightman4237]

@@mr.perfect1er QUESTIONS: Okay, it's claimed that a sub-set of humanity, in only a certain time in human history, out of all the other humans in existence on this Earth throughout time, as well as all the other species on this Earth throughout time, as well as any other life that might exist in this galaxy, as well as all the life in other galaxies, is the only chosen people of God. Really? They truly believe this? Ego centric much? * God did not make man in God's image, man made God in man's image. Additionally: a. Modern science claims energy cannot be created nor destroyed, hence energy is eternally existent. b. An absolute somethingness cannot come from an absolute nothingness, so an absolute somethingness always existed, most probably being energy itself. c. Universe ALWAYS existed in some form and NEVER had a beginning, No Creator Needed. 'a' is true, is it not? 'b' is true, is it not? If 'a' and 'b' are true, then no creator is needed in 'c'. * Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.

[@charlesbrightman4237]

@@mr.perfect1er GOD DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST EXCEPT FOR AS A CONCEPT: For those who claim God actually exists (besides as a concept), consider the following: a. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness truly existing. b. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness that has consciousness, memories and thoughts truly existing. People who claim God actually and eternally exists basically are claiming that 'b' above is correct but yet simultaneously seem to be saying that 'a' is impossible to occur. 'a' above can exist without 'b' existing but 'b' cannot exist unless 'a' exists. Even per the scientific principal of Occam's razor, 'a' is more probable of being really true rather than 'b'. I am one step away from proving God's existence, but am unable to find any actual evidence to do so. And nobody I've talked to seems to have any actual evidence of God's actual existence either. All humans appear to have are 'Theories of God'. Some humans appear to go their whole life basing their life upon their specific theory of God. Many give their God human characteristics and cannot even prove the existence of their God much less the characteristics given to their God. Some have circumstantial arguments for a God's existence, but others have circumstantial arguments for no God existing. Not one has any actual factual evidence that their God actually factually even exists. Hence, at this time in the analysis, God does not actually exist except for as a concept created by humans for humans. Humans have personified Nature and called that personification "God". Instead of what is claimed "God created man in God's image", it's more likely that "Man created God in Man's image". Further consider that if the emotional parts of the brain override the logic and reasoning parts of the brain, people can be made to believe basically anything at all as being really true. It has also been scientifically proven that the brain makes up stuff to 'fill in the blanks' of it's perceived reality. Technology is often needed to perceive items that are outside of the human senses' capabilities. Plus modern science has already proven that humans can have visual and audio hallucinations that are very real to that individual. All the more reason for critical thinking being needed and to follow the facts wherever those facts might lead. Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) even believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning. In addition, while modern science does not know what consciousness actually is yet, memories and thoughts appear to require a physical correctly functioning brain to have those items occur. Where is God's brain? Where are God's memories stored at? How are God's memories stored and retrieved? How does God think even a single coherent thought? If inside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where? If outside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where is the interface between that dimension and this dimension? No such interface has been discovered as of yet as far as I am currently aware of. * Note: Since this is a search for the real absolute truth concerning God, Intelligent Designer, Pre-existent Consciousness, etc, feel free to copy and paste this elsewhere to further the analysis and discussion. * For those who claim God actually exists besides just as a concept, please prove that 'b' above is really true and that 'a' is not really true.

[@wmatay1]

A wicked Evil leader: Proverbs 28; 1 The wicked flee when no one pursues, But the righteous are bold as a lion. 2 Because of the transgression of a land, many are its princes; But by a man of understanding and knowledge Right will be prolonged. 3 A poor man who oppresses the poor Is like a driving rain which leaves no food. 4 Those who forsake the law praise the wicked, But such as keep the law contend with them. 5 Evil men do not understand justice, But those who seek the Lord understand all. 6 Better is the poor who walks in his integrity Than one perverse in his ways, though he be rich. 7 Whoever keeps the law is a discerning son, But a companion of gluttons shames his father. 8 One who increases his possessions by usury and extortion Gathers it for him who will pity the poor. 9 One who turns away his ear from hearing the law, Even his prayer is an abomination. 10 Whoever causes the upright to go astray in an evil way, He himself will fall into his own pit; But the blameless will inherit good. 11 The rich man is wise in his own eyes, But the poor who has understanding searches him out. 12 When the righteous rejoice, there is great glory; But when the wicked arise, men hide themselves. 13 He who covers his sins will not prosper, But whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy. 14 Happy is the man who is always reverent, But he who hardens his heart will fall into calamity. 15 Like a roaring lion and a charging bear Is a wicked ruler over poor people. 16 A ruler who lacks understanding is a great oppressor, But he who hates covetousness will prolong his days. 17 A man burdened with bloodshed will flee into a pit; Let no one help him. 18 Whoever walks blamelessly will be saved, But he who is perverse in his ways will suddenly fall. 19 He who tills his land will have plenty of bread, But he who follows frivolity will have poverty enough! 20 A faithful man will abound with blessings, But he who hastens to be rich will not go unpunished. 21 To show partiality is not good, Because for a piece of bread a man will transgress. 22 A man with an evil eye hastens after riches, And does not consider that poverty will come upon him. 23 He who rebukes a man will find more favor afterward Than he who flatters with the tongue. 24 Whoever robs his father or his mother, And says, "It is no transgression," The same is companion to a destroyer. 25 He who is of a proud heart stirs up strife, But he who trusts in the Lord will be prospered. 26 He who trusts in his own heart is a fool, But whoever walks wisely will be delivered. 27 He who gives to the poor will not lack, But he who hides his eyes will have many curses. 28 When the wicked arise, men hide themselves; But when they perish, the righteous increase. Deus Lo Vult 🔥🙏⚔️🛡✝️🇬🇪🏴⛪️

[@V21IC]

What about the old FCC that had clauses that controlled the content of whatever that was broadcasted? I remember when respect, honesty, and the public well being was paramount. However, when contents are biased, intentionally telling one side or dangerously giving one side, then we will always have problems. Being biased or trying to be persuasive leads us to have some speech being more coercive than other ...even more truthful or positive than another! Marketing and advertising are by their nature biased, coercive, forceful, and are sometimes less truth by suppressing or omitting some of the truth! Politics - political speech and political parties - is biased, ommitt or suppress some of the truth. In fact, politics would even promote lies, half-truths, and the negative against the opponent or opposing views! And that's politics in it natural self! While everyone should be able and free to express themselves to another. However, they should do so in a way that is respectful to the listeners. The medium used should be made equally available for making a response to the initial expression...if a response is desired. The medium or platform used must allow the publication of the varying views as long as the publications meet certain standards. These standards should be applicable to none, to all, and be previously agreed upon by all users. These standards could include fact finding and also respect to others through speech, and even orthography! So, a person could express what they think about smoking. Others could express their disgust, dislike, or disagreement. All should be able to do so without 'attacking' or 'destroying' another. They should be allowed to respectfully state 'their' truth;i.e; their position. Also, others should be mature enough to read other expressions with which they are disagreement. Whenever there seems to be a number of expressions, or publications, that seem not to be beneficiary to the platform and it's users, the user who posted that publication should be be discouraged. Especially, when the content is by it's nature is dangerous or is against the 'standards', the user should feel obligated to remove that offending publication. Failing that, the platform should do so without any recourse. Note. This most be case by case, incident by incident. This is to avoid spreading a blanket over everything and also for the dynamism of language! In the case where the incident can be construed as something that is against the law or bordering some regulation pertaining life, health, etc., the state should be able to intervene and request that the publication be removed! However, in the public forum the state or other body decides to promote something, people, thus users on platform should be free to express their disagreement. Also, they can post what experiences they may have with the use or abstinence of anything that may be legal, or the means are legal.

[@xxcelr8rs]

Who was Twitter's lead lawyer before Elon/ X ? and What did he do? Who was he in US Federal Government before he functioned at Twitter.

[@curtisb2478]

anyone can flag social media posts, it is up to the social media platforms to decide if it violates or not.

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

The Social Media Platform isn't above the Constitution. Neither is Obama's Deep State.

[@justinfleming5119]

Which is why they made flagging into a quasi-official thing, appointing selected "civil society groups" as "trusted flaggers".

[@lidiastremciuc376]

O my goodness this person who's talking nonstop is very DENGEROUS and disturbing for Americans citizens

[@gb3239]

Once on the internet always on the internet.

[@richardbryanesq]

Good job by counsel for both sides. No clear winner in my view. I wouldn't be surprised if the decision was held off until the next term.

[@thomaspruchinski385]

This first amendment purist lawyer did a horrible job arguing this case. He needs to be more considerate of legitimate government encouragement and explain how they went outside legitimacy in this case. Instead he was basically arguing that government should never encourage.

[@shanegreen9511]

Nothing will stick to greasy Brandon. Well, maybe

[@kellycarver2500]

He is already BURIED in feces, on a SPIRITUAL level. Too many demons hanging on him to see who he even IS at this point.

[@_wokeweaklingscryoverwords_]

They already went after Catholics for exercising their right to their Beliefs, especially when it comes to the Abortion issue. They also went after Parents who stood up against the Woke Indoctrination of their Children in Public Schools.

[@debbiemurphy4813]

Get a more reliable source of information.

[@stevenphillips4080]

I am also thinking about the "DIRECT INJURY" statement spoken by Sonia Sotomayor. In the New York case with Donald Trump has not this must be pointed out. There was no "DIRECT INJURY " to anyone.

[@suestraight9701]

I have, and they don’t reveal why! 😡

[@user-zc4th1yd8s]

I hope all Brandon supporters are up to date on boosters 😂😂😂

[@SwiftD6]

Funny thing is that the pro vax crowd are the ones always catching covid. LOL

[@larryestep4167]

Only a Democrat to address the court. Why?

[@cindiallen5529]

There should be No censoring unless it is Racial or violates the law. We are told hate speech against America, our Flag & against our Vets & Military is covered under 1st A, then all the discussion we choose to have Is a ok

[@lauravs9754]

ILLEGITIMATE SCOTUS.

[@neoncat9573]

The question of what is "correct" information is at the core of all of this.. "Accurate" "factual" information according to whom?

[@martincrowe3448]

So they reduced it by 300 hundred million there a joke what they are doing is dispeckbul I live in Canada and though we had it bad I feel for the Trumps and so do all the Canadians I talk with . You have a presive person in your mix don't let go your neighbor in Canada luv the USA!!!!!

[@recoveredconservative]

Forbes refuses to release a video demonstrating that Donald Trump can't find a financial institution that trusts him enough to post his bond. He's a joke, a con man, and they know it.

[@somefrigginguy2844]

Wow

[@lilmox77]

#Rise #savrchildren

[@Flyingrabbit2222]

I'm hoping this is "Babylon Bee Day" at the court and that this theatrical production trying to pass itself off as logical "arguments" isn't expected to fool the American people. Better get involved in state politics because we are gong to have to rebuild the Republic from the ground up.

[@charliecapling5019]

And operation mockingbird?

[@tonyrhodes5541]

You're talking about 2 different things. If a terrorist post a comment about recruiting should it be censored and a person posting a different antidote than what the gov post and they want it took down even though the persons antidote may work for some people is not a threat to our national security. Just because its a different antidote than the governments doesnt merit it being taken down or an account being closed. Those are two totally different circumstances. So obvious. And after all the disinformation the gov posted they shouldn't have a right to tell any platform who can say what. We dont need the gov to save us. The gov dont know better than we do whats good for us.