Things are looking tough for the fed's censorship police in court

The Biden Administration is deeply upset that they are losing one of the key tools they have to impose a false consensus. They already functionally control most of the MSM and social media is one of the few places that alternative viewpoints can be propagated. With the 2024 election right around the corner, the government is concerned that not everybody will be forced to hail Joe Biden as a loving father and savior of American democracy.

One of the keys to the strength of the case against the government is that there is a treasure trove of actual communications in a paper trail, making clear that there weren’t abstract discussions about what is true or false, what should be amplified or not, or anything high level like that.

Rather the government demanded specific claims, specific accounts, and even specific true statements be de-amplified or outright banned in order to further their narrative. Democratic governance runs on debate, and that was exactly what the government did not want.

The lack of ambiguity is powerful, proving that the government’s claim that they had a public interest in ensuring that citizens were given only the best information during a crisis was false. While even that government interest seems weak sauce compared to the First Amendment, it is also demonstrably not what the government was interested in.

They simply wanted a particular narrative put forward as a consensus position, and lashed out at any dissent. Threatening a company if they didn’t shut somebody up is hardly the act of a purely public-spirited civil servant.