The Supreme Court has decided to rule on the government censorship and manipulation issues involved in the now unquestionably landmark Missouri vs. Biden court case.

Louisiana AG Liz Murrill reacted to the news this past week:

“We are pleased to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear this case, giving us yet another opportunity to defend the people from this assault on our First Amendment rights. It brings us one step closer to reestablishing the protections guaranteed to us in the Constitution and under the First Amendment. We hope that the Supreme Court will agree that this gross abuse of power must stop and never happen again.”

The case, brought by several state Attorney Generals, together with a number of prominent private citizens who experienced censorship first-hand, has been winding through the court system since May of 2022.

Missouri vs. Biden, along with the Twitter Files released by Elon Musk, has turned up much evidence concerning details of how Federal government agencies and figures from the FBI to Anthony Fauci pressured and colluded with social media companies like Twitter and Facebook. 

Those companies, working with government agents, widely censored Americans on everything from COVID policies to matters surrounding the 2020 election, including the sensational revelations of that Hunter Biden laptop.

And even as the court case has dropped bombshells concerning the widespread and systematic nature of the government by proxy censorship, Feds continued to pressure companies over new events like the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Though the government has partly argued its contacts with social media were mostly in the form of “requests,” Federal 5th circuit Judge Terry Doughty took a dim view of that line.

He pointed out that those “requests” from powerful government agencies, regulators and politicians carried an implicit coercive pressure, due to powers of government over the social media companies involved.

In July, Doughty issued a preliminary injunction on the government, substantively barring it from contacting social media companies for purposes of censoring speech.

Since then, issues surrounding the case have played out in appeals, and now the Supreme Court will take up the case.

The Trends Journal covered the progress of Missouri vs. Biden earlier than most other media, and forecast early on concerning its potential to be a landmark with regard to continued First Amendment rights of Americans.

We outlined the potential importance of the case in “BIDEN PUSHES FOR MORE CENSORSHIP” (11 Sep 2022).

And in October 2022 we predicted:

“The case is Missouri vs. Biden.

“It could bring the trampling of American free speech rights by the Federal government centerstage, if there’s still any honesty or integrity left in American jurisprudence.”


Biden Has Attempted to take the American Censorship State to the Next Level

Well before that, we had chronicled a troubling explosion of official censorship initiatives occurring under the Biden administration from its earliest days. 

The administration has repeatedly attempted to establish an unConstitutional “dangerous misinformation” working standard for suppressing and controlling information that runs counter to government objectives and narratives.

It even tried to institute a government “Disinformation Board,” though it was forced by public outcry to abandon that gambit.

But censorship ramped up after Trump unexpectedly won the Presidency in 2016. That event, as much as the Bush-Obama “War On Terror” era, was a catalyst in a morphing of the American government into an increasingly internally obsessed surveillance and censorship state.

Gerald Celente observed and forecast in 2018, at the time Alex Jones was being canceled from major social media:

“Censorship of independent media outlets is a dangerous, rapidly accelerating trend. With little explanation and no warning, sites that work to keep the establishment accountable, are themselves thwarted with no accountability at all.

“We forecast that censorship of media will escalate throughout the ‘free’ world. In many countries, especially in the Divided States of America, people tune into their favored sources that support their narrow agendas and fixed belief systems, ignoring alternative or multiple sources of information.

“And while Google, Facebook and Twitter will dominate market share for the foreseeable future, market gaps are widening. There is a David vs. Goliath opportunity for creative, First Amendment-driven OnTrendpreneurs® to create a populist revolution online that expands, doesn’t contract, free speech.”

TRENDPOST: For some of our past coverage regarding details and progress of the case, see here.

Even if decided in favor of the plaintiffs though, Missouri vs. Biden alone will not be enough by itself to protect free speech and political rights that our Constitution provides.

More recently, we have warned readers that foreign entities like the EU, which are not aligned with American Constitutional protections, have been busy regulating and pressuring American-based social media companies to engage in policies that would neuter our fundamental rights. (See “EURO ATTACK ON AMERICAN SOCIAL MEDIA PROVES IT’S ‘WORLD-GOV’ OR THE BILL OF RIGHTS: YOU CAN’T HAVE BOTH,” 17 Oct 2023.)

U.S. lawmakers will likely have to grapple, sooner or later with these foreign assaults, rooted in the increasingly rotten fruits of “globalism.”

Skip to content