Court gives RFK Jr. green light to sue Biden-Harris admin over censorship



A federal court rekindled hopes this week that the Biden-Harris administration could be held accountable over its efforts to have critics censored during the pandemic, ruling that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Children's Health Defense, an organization he leads, have Article III standing to sue.

The U.S. Supreme Court let the Democratic administration off the hook in June for its well-documented efforts to shut down critics of its COVID-19 policies and preferred narratives during the pandemic — policies and narratives that have been shown in the years since to have been in many cases unfounded and/or destructive.

The court's 6-3 ruling in Murthy v. Biden asserted that the states of Missouri and Louisiana, along with other plaintiffs, lacked standing to sue the Democratic administration.

'There is a substantial risk that he will suffer similar injury in the near future.'

Although the plaintiffs in Murthy were ultimately tripped up — a decision Justice Samuel Alito indicated the country might come to regret — theirs had a companion case that still had legs: Kennedy v. Biden.

U.S. District Judge Terry A. Doughty of the Western District of Louisiana, whose injunction the SCOTUS reversed in Murthy, gave Kennedy the green light Tuesday to run down the Democratic administration in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

"The Court finds that Kennedy is likely to succeed on his claim that suppression of content posted was caused by actions of Government Defendants, and there is a substantial risk that he will suffer similar injury in the near future," wrote Doughty.

In February, Doughty, a Trump-nominated judge, granted Kennedy an injunction blocking elements of the Biden-Harris administration, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI, from coercing social media companies to engage in suppression or outright censorship of content containing free speech.

This injunction was, however, put on hold pending the Supreme Court's Murthy ruling.

Following the SCOTUS' June 26 decision, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals kicked the case back to the district court, affording it an opportunity to reconsider Kennedy's standing, admitting also that he may have stronger grounds.

'This means the Biden-Harris Administration may finally be held accountable for its censorship.'

With the ball back in his court, Doughty noted that Kennedy was "identified as a member of the so-called 'Disinformation Dozen,' which was made up of twelve individuals that the Government specifically targeted for spreading alleged disinformation regarding COVID-19."

The judge indicated that elements of the Biden-Harris administration "specifically targeted" Kennedy. After all, he dared hold "positions contrary to Government positions on COVID-19, including mask mandates, vaccine mandates, vaccine injuries, lockdowns, etc."

Doughty wrote:

There is ample evidence in the record showing that Kennedy has been directly censored in the past. Not only was he a part of the alleged 'Disinformation Dozen,' which was repeatedly flagged and/or censored at the behest of numerous Defendants, but he was also censored for his anti-vaccine and anti-COVID-19 rhetoric. Therefore, Kennedy has more than satisfied the first element for Article III standing, that is, he suffered an injury-in-fact when he was censored.

According to the judge, Kennedy's presidential candidacy and political ambitions put him at further risk for future injury, raising the hypothetical of the FBI working in concert with private and governmental outfits to censor campaign-related information deemed "misinformation."

Kim Mack Rosenberg, CHD general counsel, told the defender in a statement, "Judge Terry Doughty carefully and clearly analyzed the law and facts and applied the framework from the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Murthy v. Missouri regarding standing."

"GREAT NEWS!" Children's Health Defense tweeted. "This means the Biden-Harris Administration may finally be held accountable for its censorship of us via #BigTech."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

When it comes to this issue, Rep. Jim Jordan says we’re stuck between a rock and a hard place



America’s border crisis is listed as one of the top voter issues of the 2024 election. People of all political ideologies mostly agree that illegal immigration is problematic and must be dealt with, but it seems Biden has no intentions of reversing course. Plus, with Election Day still months away, he has ample time to continue funneling more illegal immigrants into the country.

“Biden could close the border, right?” Dave Rubin asks Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

“I mean yeah ... but he probably won’t stop something that he intentionally started,” says Jordan. “They did this on purpose — willfully, deliberately, intentionally. They decided that they wanted to change three fundamental policies: no more wall, no more weight in Mexico, [and] once you’re here, you will not be detained.”

“They can stop it if they put back in place those policies, but they just don't want to.”

“When you talk to your colleagues on the other side, do they believe it's intentional? What do they think Biden’s intentions are? This is just a replacement of voters?” asks Dave.

“That’s the question. Why are they doing it? I gotta believe it’s political. Sometimes I think it's just, ‘Well President Trump did A, B, and C, so we're going to do D, E, and F; we're not going to do what he did, we're going to do the opposite,”’ Jordan speculates.

The bottom line is, “we’re down to two options: [Biden] is not going to fix it, so we can wait for the election ... or we can use the power of the Constitution the framers gave us, which is the power of purse.”

When the spending bill is due next month, we can say, “No money can be used to process or release into the country any new migrant” and instead focus on “evaluating the the 8 million who've come thus far” by having them “go through the adjudication process to see if they actually are legitimate asylum-seekers,” says Jordan, acknowledging that this course of action is the opposite of the Senate’s border bill that was designed to “keep letting the flow happen.”

In “three years and 17 days of the Biden administration, we went from a secure border to no border.”

To hear more, watch the clip below.


Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The Space Force seeks to use the metaverse to simulate space missions



The Space Force is preparing to create its own version of the metaverse to provide its service members with the ability to train in an environment simulating space travel, SpaceNews reported.

Whereas sailors in the U.S. Navy learn how to conduct naval warfare and soldiers participate in combat drills in the field, it is not possible to train guardians in outer space. Unless a guardian becomes a NASA astronaut, he or she cannot currently go to space.

Lisa Costa, the Space Force’s chief technology and innovation officer, said, “The only way they can experience their domain of operations is with a display of visual data.” She explained that utilizing metaverse technology will provide guardians with “situational awareness and understanding what their options are so they can make decisions.”

“We could create our own version of the metaverse,” Costa told the AFCEA Space Force IT conference.

The metaverse is an interconnected series of networks featuring an immersive “in-person” experience via augmented and virtual reality technologies.

In the metaverse, trainees could engineer situations involving orbital satellites. In the real world, this hands-on experience would be extremely expensive and impractical to conduct. Costa believes that this technology will enable Space Force guardians to create scenarios that enable them to continually develop new skills for various future space operations.

She said, “Training our guardians and taking advantage of the investments that industry is making” will enable Space Force to go “where we want to go next.”

In October 2021, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that his company would be changing directions to prioritize the development of the metaverse.

“Today at Connect 2021, CEO Mark Zuckerberg introduced Meta, which brings together our apps and technologies under one new company brand. Meta’s focus will be to bring the metaverse to life and help people connect, find communities and grow businesses,” the company stated in a press release.

It continued, “The metaverse will feel like a hybrid of today’s online social experiencers, sometimes expanded into three dimensions or projected into the physical world. It will let you share immersive experiences with other people even when you can’t be together — and do things together you couldn’t do in the physical world. It’s the next evolution in a long line of social technologies, and it’s ushering in a new chapter for our company.”

The metaverse, according to Craig Donato, the chief business officer for Roblox, “is very generational.” It has considerable corporate backing from tech companies and appears to fall in line with interests of younger generations.

Costa indicated that nearly 90% of U.S. airmen and guardians from ages 18 to 34 consider themselves to be “gamers.” Incorporating the metaverse into the routines of people who are already acquainted with sophisticated, immersive technology as a way to develop skills for their military service is a logical way to utilize its development.

Facebook blocks #revolution over Independence Day weekend: report



Facebook reportedly blocked the hashtag "revolution" over Independence Day weekend, according to The Washington Times.

What are the details?

The outlet said the report came to a head on Sunday after several social media users tweeted that the social media networking platform blocked #revolution from view, and those users searching for the hashtag were met with a "Keeping Our Community Safe" notification acknowledging that "[p]osts with revolution are temporarily hidden here."

"Some content in those posts goes against our Community Standards," the notification read.

The Times notes that Facebook — which bans content that violates policies against "violence and incitement," "false news," and more — did not explain why "revolution" was blocked.

The hashtag, according to the outlet, was still blocked as of Sunday, but by Tuesday, #revolution did render related search results.

The Washington Times said that it reached out to Facebook for comment on the matter.

Author Jim Hanson tweeted about the news, writing, "Can you believe #Facebook is blocking searches for #revolution on the f**king anniversary of the American Revolution? Time to depose the tech tyrants (using legal means you treacherous bastards) #July4th[.]"

Can you believe #Facebook is blocking searches for #revolution on the f**king anniversary of the American Revolutio… https://t.co/N42kjFmPfz

— Jim Hanson (@JimHansonDC) 1625409599.0

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) tweeted, "Welcome to the re-education of America on Independence Day weekend[.]"

Welcome to the re-education of America on Independence Day weekend... https://t.co/JAQU2BxGOG

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) 1625319727.0

Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.) added, "#BigTech at it again, prohibiting Americans from commemorating our independence from a tyrannical government. They don't want to teach history because it is repeating itself. Wake up, America."

#BigTech at it again, prohibiting Americans from commemorating our independence from a tyrannical government. The… https://t.co/vxHTSc8U8j

— Rep. Madison Cawthorn (@RepCawthorn) 1625337401.0

Anything else to know?

In April, Facebook's Oversight Board announced it would begin censoring any content by accepting appeals from users who reported the content if it offended them.

"After you have exhausted Facebook's appeals process, you will receive an Oversight Board Reference ID in your support inbox and can appeal the decision to the Board," a statement on the move read. "You can appeal decisions on posts and statuses, as well as photos, videos, comments and shares."

The Oversight Board added, "Now, users can also appeal content to the Board which they think should be removed from Facebook or Instagram. The Board will use its independent judgment to decide what to leave up and what to take down. Our decisions will be binding on Facebook."

“After you have exhausted Facebook's appeals process, you will receive an Oversight Board Reference ID in your support inbox and can appeal the decision to the Board," the statement continued. “You can appeal decisions on posts and statuses, as well as photos, videos, comments and shares."

Eventbrite, Facebook, and Mailchimp accused of suppressing 'March for Trump' DC rally



Organizers of a march planned in support of President Donald Trump's legal efforts to contest the projected results of his challenge from Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden say Facebook, Mailchimp, and Eventbrite have all tried to "cancel" their movement.

What are the details?

Women for Trump co-founder Amy Kremer tweeted Tuesday that "The #MarchForTrump IS NOT CANCELED," saying, "@Eventbrite just shut down our event & emailed everyone that it was canceled THE MARCH IS NOT CANCELED First it was @Facebook Next it was @Mailchimp Now #Eventbrite#BigTech is trying shut down our march But we won't let them."

Kremer attached an email apparently sent from Eventbrite that explained:

"We encourage our organizers to express their views and gather for a chosen purpose as long as it's done in a way that doesn't violate our Terms of Service. We do not permit events, content, or creators that share or promote potentially harmful misinformation. In this instance, we have determined that your event violates our Community Guidelines and is therefore not permitted on the Eventbrite platform. As a result, your event listing has been removed and any paid orders have been refunded."

The notice further warned, "While you may continue to use Eventbrite for other events, please not that repeated or severe violations of our Guidelines may results in your account being terminated."

🚨🚨The #MarchForTrump IS NOT CANCELED🚨🚨@Eventbrite just shut down our event & emailed everyone that it was cancele… https://t.co/yHzVlKXGwh
— Amy Kremer (@Amy Kremer)1605027083.0

Neither Eventbrite, Facebook, or Mailchimp immediately responded to Fox Business' request for comment on the tweet.

Yet, the outlet did note that while "this weekend's event may be blocked, a separate event for March 21 from an anonymous organizer titled 'March on Washington for Trump' remains listed on the site. Additionally, a search of Facebook event listings shows several events listed on Saturday with titles including the phrase 'March for Trump.' None of them appear to be hosted by Kremer or her group."

The March for Trump is slated for Nov. 14 at noon in Washington, D.C. The invitation at stopthesteal.us reads:

Democrats are scheming to disenfranchise and nullify Republican votes.

It's up to us to stop it.

We will NOT back down!

This Saturday, thousands of patriots will be meeting at Freedom Plaza at noon and marching to the Supreme Court to show our support for the integrity of every American's vote and our support for President Trump exhausting every legal recourse available to ensure that EVERY LEGAL VOTE counts and that NO LEGAL VOTE is diluted.

At Freedom Plaza, we will hear from grassroots supporters of Trump and conservative leaders who are invested in ensuring that the integrity and faith in our system of government doesn't falter. This concept isn't a formality. It is foundational to who we are as a free people. And then we will march in a show of support for the President and his continued fight.

So come join us and let your voice be heard as we stand up for the disenfranchised and the voiceless.

What's the background?

Trump supporters are conducting rallies to get behind the president as his campaign fights lawsuits in several battleground states alleging voting irregularities and voter fraud after mainstream media roundly called the Nov. 3 election for Biden.

Meanwhile, Trump has refused to concede the election, while Biden is actively moving toward a transition to power.

FCC chief says Facebook and Twitter will face greater regulation after NY Post Biden debacle



The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission issued a statement warning that change is coming to the rule governing the federal regulation of companies like Twitter and Facebook after New York Post Biden debacle.

Ajit Pai tweeted his statement via his official social media account on Thursday.

"Members of all three branches of the federal government have expressed serious concerns about the prevailing interpretation of the immunity set forth in section 230 of the Communications Act. There is bipartisan support in Congress to reform the law," said Pai.

Pai noted that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas opined that internet platforms have been granted protections by courts that extend far beyond the original intent of the law.

"The Commission's General Counsel has informed me that the FCC has the legal authority to interpret Section 230. Consistent with this advice, I intend to move forward with a rulemaking to clarify its meaning," Pai continued.

"Throughout my tenure at the Federal Communications Commission, I have favored regulatory parity, transparency, and free expression. Social media companies have a First Amendment right to free speech," he concluded. "But they do not have a First Amendment right to a special immunity denied to other media outlets, such as newspapers and broadcasters.

Pai didn't mention the controversy over the banning of the NY Post Biden story, but critics and supporters alike immediately connected his announcement to the scandal.

"This is a major announcement"

Pai's announcement was greeted with applause from those who have been demanding an expansion of federal oversight over the more prominent social media companies.

"This is a major announcement from FCC on #BigTech. Now Congress must act on #Section230," said Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri. He went on to mock free market conservatives who decried big government intervention.

Others, like FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, perceived the announcement to be motivated by the political agenda of President Donald Trump.

"The FCC has no business being the President's speech police," said Rosenworcel.

On Wednesday Twitter released a statement explaining that they had decided to ban the posting of the New York Post article because it contained personal and private information, which they said was against their rules, and implied that there was no political motivation to their actions.

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey admitted that it was "unacceptable" that they acted without explaining the context of the ban.

Here's more about the Burisma Biden controversy:

'Smoking gun' emails reveal alleged meeting between Joe Biden and Ukrainian companywww.youtube.com

Twitter completely censors New York Post's Hunter Biden story; users can't even send it in DMs



After Facebook limited the distribution of the New York Post's bombshell Hunter Biden story, Twitter users are reporting an inability to share the story on the platform.

As the video from the Daily Caller's White House Correspondent Anders Hagstrom shows, an error message appears when users attempt to share the story, which Twitter has labeled as "potentially harmful."

Twitter is prohibiting users from sharing the @nypost’s Hunter Biden story because the link is “potentially harmful… https://t.co/pFwr14sdrb
— Anders Hagstrom (@Anders Hagstrom)1602700718.0

New York Magazine contributor Yashar Ali reported the censorship, along with a statement from Twitter explaining why it is blocking the spread of the New York Post's article.

"Given the lack of authoritative reporting on the origins of the materials included in the article, we're taking action to limit the spread of this information," Twitter said in a statement shared by Ali.

"As our Hacked Material Policy states, 'we don't permit the use of our services to directly distribute content obtained through hacking that contains private information, may put people in physical harm or danger, or contains trade secrets," Twitter said.

From Twitter re blocking the NY Post link. https://t.co/k908Xf1ODV https://t.co/sOMS29lTfB
— Yashar Ali 🐘 (@Yashar Ali 🐘)1602702700.0

On Wednesday, the New York Post published what the paper says is email correspondence between Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden and Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser to the board of Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma, appearing to show Pozharskyi thanking the younger Biden for setting up a meeting with his father, who was then serving as vice president. The email, if true, would contradict claims from Biden that he's never spoken with his son about his overseas business dealings.

According to the Post, the email was contained in "massive trove of data recovered from a laptop computer." The computer was dropped off at a repair shop in Biden's home state of Delaware in April 2019 and the owner of the shop told the Post it was never retrieved by its owner.

Nothing in the Post's story suggests the email or other material recovered from the laptop was "hacked."

Several commentators and even some lawmakers expressed shock and outrage at the steps Twitter and Facebook have taken to suppress the Post's story.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a crusader against powerful social media companies, accused Facebook and Twitter of censorship and remarked, "you almost get the idea #bigtech wants to buy this election."

House Judiciary Committee Republicans tweeted the story and asked other users to share it because "The mainstream media doesn't want you to share this article."

The mainstream media doesn’t want you to share this article. RT to make sure you do. https://t.co/UgakOk0IvE
— House Judiciary GOP (@House Judiciary GOP)1602689146.0

New York Post opinion writer Sohrab Ahmari called Twitter's actions "a digital civil war."

This is a Big Tech information coup. This is digital civil war. I, an editor at The New York Post, one of the nat… https://t.co/aJNQhZjK4w
— Sohrab Ahmari (@Sohrab Ahmari)1602700338.0

Writer Mark Hemingway said the actions by Twitter verge into "'enemy of the people' territory," referencing President Donald Trump's frequent claim that the mainstream media and social media's bias makes them the enemy of the people.

I'm not in the habit of defending Trump's rhetorical excesses, but tech companies unilaterally suppressing bad news… https://t.co/n97AaMlpkv
— Mark Hemingway (@Mark Hemingway)1602701228.0

The Dispatch's David French noted that Twitter and Facebook never censored information reported from the infamous Steele Dossier, despite many of the claims made about President Donald Trump having been false.

Speaking of sketchy oppo dumps and online censorship -- why is the Steele dossier still freely available (and still… https://t.co/h0r0XOKI00
— David French (@David French)1602703321.0

The Federalist's Mollie Hemingway pointed out that Twitter took no steps to limit the distribution of the New York Times' story on President Trump's taxes.

The New York Times never even pretended to explain how it hacked Trump's tax records and yet Twitter *promoted* lin… https://t.co/5ktwJkb6wM
— Mollie (@Mollie)1602703430.0

And Lee Fang, a reporter for the Intercept, also noted the discrepancy in Twitter's enforcement of this policy.