Here is how the Supreme Court could derail the biggest free speech case in US history
MAR 19, 2024
∙ PAID
Gateway Pundit:
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.1
I can think of a dozen ways the Court could justify ruling for the government in this case.
But lurking in the background is the MEDICAL JUSTIFICATION.
The Court could decide free speech opposing SCIENCE is just too egregious and must be censored and squashed, “in order to save lives.”
Meaning: In order to protect what the government SAYS SCIENCE IS.
This latter notion wouldn’t be stated explicitly in the Court’s decision, of course. It would hover in the Justices’ minds like a holy of holies.
SCIENCE.
“No one should be able to attack science under the umbrella of the 1st Amendment.”
Opening the door to criticism of science from all comers would be tantamount to admitting that official science is not the final word.
What are state medical boards saying every day? “We decide what science is. If a doctor contradicts us, we will yank his license. We will use that power to silence him.”2
In its final judgment, the Court could rule that COVID was such a huge emergency and threat, the 1st Amendment could be temporality suspended or “softened.”
But again, what the Justices would really be thinking is: “We can’t allow a free-for-all open field where anyone can attack ‘established science’.”
This was exactly the position of the Vatican during the period when it held enormous political power. Just substitute “our version of the Word of God” for science.
Why do you think I’ve been writing about the medical cartel and the medical police state for the past 35 years? Because it has monopolistic power. Because it can kill and maim with impunity. Because the government supports the cartel.
And now we have this crucial case before the Supreme Court.
This post is for paid subscribers
Subscribe