Rogan O'Handley says another case about government censorship of free speech is still in play

Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong released a statement regarding the U.S. Supreme Court decision today in Murthy v. Missouri which tested the government’s ability to collaborate with social media companies to address alleged "disinformation and dangerous content" on their platforms.

“This decision rightly preserves the government’s ability to work with social media companies to address the spread of disinformation and dangerous content online. This is all-hands-on-deck kind of work. We need governments and platforms working closely together to root out violent content, cyberbullying, child predators, and deeply damaging disinformation regarding public health, our democracy, and more,” said AG Tong.

Connecticut had joined other states in an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to allow the government to continue to be able to urge, encourage, pressure or induce the removal, deletion, suppression or reduction of content containing free speech protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The news about the SCOTUS decision was upsetting to many, especially those in the medical freedom movement who were censored for sharing truthful information about dangerous covid vaccines, for instance.

"There is a lot of doom and gloom about the 6-3 SCOTUS decision in Murthy v. Biden and how it impacts the 1st Amendment," wrote Rogan O’Handley on X who said he would "like to quell some of those concerns."

He went on to explain that, "the case is still allowed to proceed *on the merits* in lower federal courts as to whether the gov’t violated the plaintiff’s 1st Amendment right to free speech on social media."

Then O'Handley teased about another potential Supreme Court case.

"But what if I told you there was *another* case still sitting in their hands that deals with gov’t censorship of free speech on social media and it directly impacts the 9th circuit (where all Big Tech companies are located)," wrote O'Handley.

That case is O’Handley v. Weber.

O'Handley brought the case against Twitter after he found out that the California Secretary of State sent an email to Twitter telling them to censor O'Handley over "election misinformation."

The Supreme Court has been holding the case for over a year, though O'Handley is hoping for a ruling sometime in the next 2-3 weeks.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!‘