‘Most Important Free Speech Case in Our Lifetime’: Supreme Court Hears Biden Censorship Case

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in what’s being described as one of the biggest free speech cases in a generation. 

The question at hand in Murthy v. Missouri was over whether the Biden administration went too far by pressuring social media sites to censor certain content. 

Conservatives argue the administration did indeed overstep its bounds, censoring some Americans along the way. 

The targeted content included posts on COVID-19 and the 2020 election, among other topics. 

For its part, the Biden administration framed its efforts as a crackdown on disinformation. 

“It shouldn’t come as any surprise that we’re in regular touch with social media platforms, just like we’re in regular touch with all of you and your media outlets,” former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters in July 2021.  

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Missouri) sued the administration over the issue back when he was Missouri’s attorney general. 

He believes the stakes couldn’t be higher for the country. 

“It’s the most important free speech case in our lifetime because it involves some of the highest ranking in our country colluding and coercing with some of the biggest social media companies in the world to suppress millions of posts,” Schmidt told Fox News. “Posts related to the Hunter Biden laptop story, the origins of Covid, the lab leak, efficacy of masks, and much more.”

It’s unclear how the court will rule but many of the justices seemed skeptical of the conservative argument. 

Several hypothetical questions were raised, among them: Could the FBI ask Facebook to take down a post that encouraged harm against a public official? Could the White House ask X to delete a post that put American troops at risk? 

Justice Samuel Alito was one who seemed leery of the Biden administration’s position. 

“The only reason why this is taking place is because the federal government has got section 230 and anti trust in its pocket,” said Alito, referring to section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. “To mix my metaphors, it’s got these big clubs available to it and so it’s treating Facebook and these other platforms like their subordinates.”

The case comes right in the middle of an election year and has big implications for how the government can interact with social media companies about content moderation.  

A decision from the court is expected at the end of the term in late June or early July.