A Consent Decree in Missouri v. Biden now bars the CDC, CISA, and the U.S. Surgeon General from coercing social media platforms to suppress protected speech for the next decade.
I have the same question. If these practices are unlawful, there should not be an implication they can resume in 10 years. Perhaps it's only the oversight required by the Consent Decree that ends in a decade.
Sorry, this is all useless. Violating our constitutional rights is a crime. They did that with impunity. Why would they not violate this decree now? Until people are thrown in prison for their crimes, they will continue to repeat those crimes.
A consent decree that makes up for the cowardice of the Supreme Court which ruled it was okay to censor Americans. Maybe within 10 years the Supremes will gain the backbone to do what's right.
When will "X" (Twitter) retract? Before the sun burns out? (They "suspended" me for suggesting HUMANS might use ivermectin for onchocersiasis. 5 years ago! Yes, I've appealed repeatedly. They suggest deleting the suggestion.)
It has become routine for lawmakers - and apparently judges - to hedge on making important changes by sunsetting them. Spineless and disgusting, but it's better than nothing.
This is from District Court Judge Terry A. Doughty, who has issued at least one other great decision. But can't it be overruled by Circuit or Supremes? Or can we assume that there's nobody in the Federal government who would want to pursue this?
Progress, but Congress needs to repeal the Smith Mundt Modenization Act, which makes it legal for US government to propagandize Americans. In addition, Congress needs to make it illegal for any government agency to pressure, coerce, or order tech or media companies to censor any individual.
Why only a decade?
Agree 100%. Free speech is a first amendment right!
Why not forever.
I have the same question. If these practices are unlawful, there should not be an implication they can resume in 10 years. Perhaps it's only the oversight required by the Consent Decree that ends in a decade.
Exactly my question!
Sorry, this is all useless. Violating our constitutional rights is a crime. They did that with impunity. Why would they not violate this decree now? Until people are thrown in prison for their crimes, they will continue to repeat those crimes.
Great , better than nothing… but how about FOREVER.
Why just 10 yrs?
A consent decree that makes up for the cowardice of the Supreme Court which ruled it was okay to censor Americans. Maybe within 10 years the Supremes will gain the backbone to do what's right.
This shouldn't be limited by a number of years.
Should be for ever
When will "X" (Twitter) retract? Before the sun burns out? (They "suspended" me for suggesting HUMANS might use ivermectin for onchocersiasis. 5 years ago! Yes, I've appealed repeatedly. They suggest deleting the suggestion.)
It has become routine for lawmakers - and apparently judges - to hedge on making important changes by sunsetting them. Spineless and disgusting, but it's better than nothing.
This is from District Court Judge Terry A. Doughty, who has issued at least one other great decision. But can't it be overruled by Circuit or Supremes? Or can we assume that there's nobody in the Federal government who would want to pursue this?
The First Amendment already does that for all time, not just for a decade. Where are the lawsuits for civil rights violations by these people?
"for 10 years"....
Very pleased, but like others, it sounds strange to put a time limit on it. I would also like to know why.
We'll see how this ages. Hopefully it ages well...
Progress, but Congress needs to repeal the Smith Mundt Modenization Act, which makes it legal for US government to propagandize Americans. In addition, Congress needs to make it illegal for any government agency to pressure, coerce, or order tech or media companies to censor any individual.
?????????......."for the next decade."
Umm.....they might want to READ THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION!!
It.......NEVER EXPIRES! (unless WE, THE PEOPLE.....SAY that it does!)