March 18: DC Rally To Restore Free Speech!

The landmark case Murthy v. Missouri (formerly Missouri v. Biden) challenging government censorship on social media is considered the most important Free Speech Rights case in US history! On March 18, the Supreme Court will decide whether to uphold the injunction against five federal agencies in the case. At stake is whether the government can direct social media companies to censor and suppress speech protected by the First Amendment. People from all over the country will converge on the Supreme Court Building to send a message to jurists and policymakers that our right to free speech shall not be infringed by any administration.

Rally At Supreme Court 9AM

Children’s Health Defense will hold a rally outside the Supreme Court Building beginning at 9 AM at One First Street NE in Washington, DC. All free speech advocates are invited to attend this free public event CHD TV, X, and Rumble. CHD TV will live stream the event and CHD’s X account will broadcast live audio of the oral arguments before the Supreme Court.

Speakers include Del Bigtree, founder of the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) filmmaker, and individual-liberties activist; CHD founder and president Mary Holland; Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance founders Pierre Kory, MD, and Paul Marik, MD; Aaron Kheriaty, MD, director of the Program in Bioethics and American Democracy at the Ethics and Public Policy Center; and libertarian author and publisher Jeffrey Tucker, president of the Brownstone Institute.

Although censorship surrounding information on COVID-19 from medical doctors, scientists, and researchers was the primary impetus behind the Murthy v. Missouri appeal, evidence presented to the court goes far beyond public health issues. Statements of political support for candidates for public office, satire, commentary on foreign policy, antiwar activism, free speech advocacy, children’s rights advocacy, and criticism of public officials have all been subject to censorship at the direct behest of the Biden administration. SCOTUS will hear arguments on why this is a violation of the First Amendment.

Supreme Court’s Free Speech Decision March 18

Multiple plaintiffs, including epidemiologists, consumer and human rights advocates, academics, and media operators, claimed that various defendants, including numerous federal agencies and officials, engaged in censorship, targeting conservative-leaning speech on topics such as the 2020 presidential election, COVID-19 origins, mask and vaccine efficacy, and election integrity.

The plaintiffs argue that the defendants used public statements and threats of regulatory action, such as reforming Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, to induce social media platforms to suppress content, thereby violating the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights. The States of Missouri and Louisiana also alleged harm due to the infringement of the free speech rights of their citizens.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a nationwide preliminary injunction prohibiting the federal government from meeting with social media companies or otherwise seeking to influence their content-moderation policies. The U.S. Supreme Court granted the government’s motion for an emergency stay and granted certiorari to review the case on the merits. Did the federal government’s request that private social media companies take steps to prevent the dissemination of purported misinformation transform those companies’ content-moderation decisions into state action and thus violate users’ First Amendment rights?

Free Speech on Trial

In a lifetime of observing policy controversies and court cases, I’ve never witnessed anything as crucial to the future of the idea of freedom itself compared with what will transpire on March 18, 2024. On that day, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Murthy v. Missouri concerning whether the government can force or nudge private companies to censor users on behalf of regime priorities.

The evidence that they have been doing so is overwhelming. That’s why the 5th Circuit issued an emergency injunction to stop the practice on grounds that it is inconsistent with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The censorship industrial complex is working right now and hourly to delete free speech in America. That injunction was stayed pending a review by the highest court. The case itself hasn’t even gone to court. This decision is only about the injunction itself, which was issued based on the alarming results of discovery alone. Essentially, the lower court is screaming, “This must stop.”

The Supreme Court is trying to assess whether the violations of liberty are extreme enough to justify a pre-trial intervention now.

The Stakes

A positive ruling for the plaintiffs doesn’t solve every problem but at least it will mean that freedom still stands a chance in this country. A ruling for the defense, which is essentially the government itself, will give license to every federal agency — including those that operate in secret like the FBI and CIA — to threaten every social media and media company in this country to delete any and all content that runs contrary to the approved narrative.

There will be celebration in Washington if this happens. On the other hand, there will be tears if the court decides for the defense. It could be that the court will take an in-between position, refusing to let the injunction go ahead and promising some possible decision at a later date pending trial. That would be a disaster because it could mean three or more years of full censorship pending an appeal of whatever the outcome of the trial is.

Free speech is everything. If we don’t have that, we have nothing and freedom is toast. All other problems pale in comparison. There are plenty of them, from health care to immigration, but if we don’t have free speech, we cannot get the truth out about any of them. The censorship industrial complex is wholly dedicated to making sure that we have no debates at all and that dissident voices are not even heard.

Social Media Censors

As it is, Google, Microsoft and Facebook — and many more besides — already heavily restrict speech. They work in cooperation with government and those tasked by government to do elite bidding. We know this for a fact.

When Elon Musk took over Twitter, he discovered a vast censorship machine operating on behalf of the FBI and other agencies. Millions of posts were being taken down along with users. He has done his best to rip out the guts of this borg. Doing so entirely changed the character of the site. It became useful again. Not even the scale of the problem is widely understood. Usually people say that free speech is necessary to protect minority opinions. In this case, the numbers don’t matter to the censors. You could have 90% of users trying to advance an idea and still have it censored.

This is what the old Twitter did. It was daily and hourly attacking the company’s user base. This was their job, no matter how much it contradicts the whole point of social media. This could pertain to EVs, gender transitions, lockdowns, immigration or anything else. Even now, the Google artificial intelligence engine extols the glories of lockdowns, masking and mass injections while completely ignoring contrary science. This is how they want things to be. Google’s search engine is no better. It might as well be a federal agency.

The justices hearing the case will be in an awkward position. My guess is that none of them even knows that this is going on to the extent it is. They will likely be shocked when they look at the evidence providing that there is a trillion-dollar industry in full operation that has massively distorted the public mind. Every federal agency is involved, deeply embedded in the operations of all media companies and digital technology, which in turn requires universal surveillance and persecution of contrary voices.

The Public Has Woken Up

Until just a few years ago, this entire industry — which involves federal agencies, universities, nonprofits, shadow companies, bogus fact-checks, and every manner of spook-operated front companies — was not known to exist. Now that we know, we are shocked by the extent of it. It has invaded the whole of our lives to the point that we cannot tell the real news from that which is fed to us by intelligence agencies. Even worse, we’ve come to expect that most of what passes for approved opinion is flat-out false.

The justices will discover this truth. They will likely be astonished. But they will also be taken aback by how integral to our lives it has become. As it turns out, the federal government for nearly a decade has placed a very high priority on curating the public mind, lying at every turn for its own benefit and that of its industrial partners…. [See the site for the remainder of the article]

Supreme Court Case on Free Speech

Jeffrey Tucker is the Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute. He is Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times and the author of 10 books, including Life After Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He is interviewed in the video further below and is the author of the article below.

Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, Senior Brownstone Institute Counselor, is a Scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, DC. He is a former Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California at Irvine School of Medicine where he was the director of Medical Ethics. Dr. Kheriaty is one of five private plaintiffs in the landmark free speech case Missouri v. Biden.

He explains In the video below that in the preliminary injunction against five federal agencies , the judge ruled that this case shows the worst violation of Free Speech Rights in US history! Dr. Kheriaty explains in the video below that during the rally in Washington, DC on March 18, the Supreme Court will decide whether to uphold the injunction against five federal agencies in the landmark Missouri v. Biden case challenging government censorship on social media. It is considered the most imports Free Speech Rights case in US history!

Thousands of free-speech advocates from across the country will rally on the steps of the Supreme Court on Monday, March 18, to protest the Biden administration’s efforts to coerce and pressure the media and Big Tech to do its bidding.

Could this be the most consequential Supreme Court case for free speech of the 21st century? When organizations and individuals shared research studies, official government statements and personal opinions — related to the COVID pandemic and its policies — they were threatened on social media with account closure, had their posts labeled as ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ and faced other consequences for posting information that was accurate or merely did not fit the ‘narrative.’

Has justice been served for what took place? Find out, today, as Michael Kane and his ‘Good Morning CHD’ guests share a critical update on this high-level lawsuit.

Watch this amazing interview (video): 3/5/24

Dr. Kheriaty’s Articles

The White House Covid Censorship Machine 1/8/23
The Censorship Hegemon Must Be Stopped 6/11/23 : My co-plaintiffs, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, and I were censored for content related to COVID and public health policy that the government disfavored. Documents we have reviewed on discovery demonstrate that government censorship was far more wide-ranging than previously known, from election integrity and the Hunter Biden laptop story to gender ideology, abortion, monetary policy, the US banking system, the war in Ukraine, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, and more. There is hardly a topic of recent public discussion and debate that the US government has not targeted for censorship….CISA, which is a subagency of the DHS, established its own authority over the cognitive infrastructure by becoming the central hub coordinating the government’s information control activities. This pattern was repeated in several other government agencies around the same time (there are currently a dozen federal agencies named among the defendants in our suit).
We Landed a Major Blow Against the Censorship Leviathan 7/6/23
The White House’s ‘Misinformation’ Pressure Campaign Was Unconstitutional 9/30/23

The Great Barrington Declaration

Dr. Kheriaty says in the video above that Dr. Martin Kulldoff and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya are co-plaintiffs in the case. The Great Barrington Declaration was released to the public on October 4, 2020. It argued for focused protection for vulnerable elderly and ending the lockdown for everyone else – allowing children to return to school normally. It was signed by many doctors and scientists and now has 939,000 signatures. It could have ended the lockdown in 2020 and much of the consequences of the disastrous COVID policies.

The Declaration was created by:

Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations
Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.
Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.

The New Abnormal: The Rise of the Biomedical Security State

Amazon Description

The coronavirus pandemic conferred enormous power on certain government officials. They have no intention of giving it up. In the space of a few weeks in early 2020, Americans witnessed the imposition of previously-unimagined social controls by the biomedical security state—the unelected technocrats who suddenly enjoyed nearly absolute power to incarcerate, isolate, and medicate the entire population.

In this chilling new book, a dissident scientist reveals:

the people and organizations that form the biomedical security state

its role in the origin of the pandemic and shaping the government response

why it is a threat to science, public health, and individual freedom

what can be done to confront and defeat this new Leviathan

When COVID-19 broke out, Dr. Aaron Kheriaty’s work put him on the front lines. Realizing that the mental, physical, and economic toll of lockdowns was catastrophic, he began to protest that the cure was worse than the disease—an intolerable heresy. When he refused vaccination because he had natural immunity from a previous infection, the University of California, Irvine, medical school fired him. He fought back, in the courts and in the media, and has become a reliable source of truth amid official obfuscation and censorship.

Now it’s time for all of us to fight back. The deadly and arrogant misrule of the biomedical security state must not become the “new normal.”

Brownstone Institute Comments

A Close Look at the Amici Briefs in Murthy v. Missouri 3/7/24

The convergence of state and corporate power has spawned unexpected bedfellows as Stanford University, the CATO Institute, and Letitia James have joined forces to support the censorship regime in Murthy v. Missouri.

The David and Goliath dynamic of the case – which will have oral arguments before the Supreme Court on March 18 – cannot be overstated. One side carries the combined power of the intelligence community and the federal government colluding with the largest information centers in the history of the world on behalf of the country’s largest lobbying forces.

Against that hegemon stands a series of independent doctors, news outlets, and state attorneys general. To this point, four federal judges have found that the Biden Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the CIA violated the First Amendment in its ongoing collaboration with Big Tech to censor disapproved narratives, including those related to Covid, crime, and mail-in voting.

During the legal process, third parties can present briefs, called amici curiae, to the courts that explain their interests and offer support for either side of a case. Brownstone has reviewed the amici curiae in Murthy v. Missouri and found that a coalition of libertarians, academics, and blue states all stand together to support society’s most powerful groups. Their briefs expose the insidious corruption and perverse financial incentives that underpin the censorship industry. Perhaps more alarmingly, they reveal how once-trusted institutions now stand athwart free expression in their pursuit of mammon, ideology, and power….

The return of Humpty Dumpty: who is the ultimate arbiter of meaning?

“When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” These are the famous words of Humpty Dumpty, a character in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass (1871).

His conversation partner, Alice, is rather skeptical. “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master——that’s all.”

Understanding US Government’s Mass Censorship Campaign

Michael Benz, Executive Director of the Foundation for Freedom Online, served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Communications and Information Technology at the US State Department from the Fall of 2020 to January 2021. The Chilling Reality of Modern Censorship in the U.S. with Mike Benz. The World According to Mike Benz. Mike Benz: U.S. Government Turned AI “Censorship Superweapons” Designed To Fight Terror Against Trump, Brexit, Climate Skeptics.

In the videos below, Benz explains that the legacy media (New York Times, Washington Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc). were always controlled by the National Security State. So, the Fourth Estate never operated as the US Founding Fathers wanted, as a check and balance on the other three branches of government – the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. The globalists were able to control what people thought and how they voted through the information provided.

However, that changed in 2016 with the election of Donald Trump as president and Brexit. It was clear that citizen journalists on the internet were empowering nationalists and other European nations threatened to also leave the European Union. That threatened NATO as well as the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. The rise of nationals now threatened the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and the World Economic Forum.

Mike Benz: AI Censorship, 2024 Elections, & The Future of Democracy.

In this thought-provoking episode, we delve into the world of AI censorship and its impact on the internet and society. From the rise of tech giants to the spread of misinformation and disinformation, we explore critical moments that shaped the digital landscape, including the 2016 election. Join us as we analyze the role of AI in politics, elections, and potential conflicts, and raise essential questions about the future of information control in an AI-driven world. Michael A. Benz, is Executive Director of the Foundation for Freedom Online.

Benz founded FFO as a civil society institution building on his experience in the role of championing digital freedom around the world in the public sector. He previously served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Communications and Information Technology at the US State Department from Fall 2020 through January 2021. Prior to this, Mike served as a White House speechwriter for President Trump and advised on tech matters. Before that, he served as speechwriter to Housing and Urban Development Secretary, Dr. Ben Carson and was a policy adviser on economic development. Before his roles in the public sector, he practiced business law for seven years as an attorney in New York, primarily representing technology companies and financial firms.

Transcript of interview below which mentions the Missouri vs. Biden lawsuit.

Everything You Need to Know about the Government’s Mass Censorship Campaign 2/16/24

The national security state is the main driver of censorship and election interference in the United States. “What I’m describing is military rule,” says Mike Benz. “It’s the inversion of democracy.”

Medical Free Speech Under Threat (video) 3/13/24

“People have the right to have information…from professionals” — With the First Amendment under attack, how can doctors advocate for, treat and educate their patients, and how will the general public know they are getting proper informed consent? That’s why former NBA all-star, John Stockton, and attorney Richard Jaffe, Esq. have banded together to challenge the vilification of speech and protect the “rights of physicians to speak to patients their truth and to the public.” Learn the details in this episode of ‘Good Morning CHD.’

Historic Power Shift Now: Centralization vs Decentralization

Joe Rogan interviewed Maajid Nawaz on 2/20/22. Nawaz explained that the global takeover by the World Economic Forum was a wakeup call to humanity and millions of people who may not have heard of The Great Reset suddenly got interested.

This is a 2-minute preview of the show: Watch Joe Rogan Get Red Pilled On The WEF, Klaus Schwab, and Digital ID’s aka The Great Reset “WATCH — Maajid Nawaz explains that people in power shut down debate to create a void where reason, logic, and truth no longer exist, but where power can define reality.” For a 15-minute snip of the show, watch: The Great Reset | Maajid Nawaz BLOWS Joe Rogan’s Mind Explaining Klaus Schwab’s Agenda.

?

WTF?? Great Reset Total Global Control Plan Exposed on Joe Rogan? 2/22/22

At 2:15 in the 3-hour show Joe Rogan Left Speechless on WEF infiltrating Governments, The Great Reset Is Now Out In the Open, Nawaz explained that we are in a pivotal moment in history because of the ways in which the internet and cryptocurrencies are decentralizing information and money — and thus power. He says this is similar in the shift in power caused by the Gutenberg printing press. Nawaz said decentralization of the media is causing a critical shift because whoever define truths defines reality. Whoever defines the story controls the world.

?

The Powers That Be that are losing control of the narrative and the money supply needed to retain power. Nawaz says, “So, it’s an internal civil war over truth and over information.” The conflict is not about Left or Right. It is about Centralization or Decentralization. He says humanity is facing a crossroads now — total centralization (slavery) or decentralization (freedom).

Globalization looks like the West’s new attempt to control the world – but with an anti-human story, a story of transhumanism that the World Economic Forum promotes. Humans are hackable animals, We can manipulate, control and even replace people, YUVAL HARARI.

Nationalists are fighting to defend humanity by protecting their national identity and sovereignty.