Admin wants silence anyone critical of COVID shots

Bob Unruh
WND News Center

The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to review the conspiracy involving the Joe Biden White House and social-media companies.

The American Freedom Law Center said it has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the case that involves Biden and Twitter, a company now rebranded as “X,” in a case that charges Twitter censored speech critical of the administration’s COVID-19 vaccination policy on behalf of the Biden administration in violation of the First Amendment.

It was after Dr. Colleen Huber posted a statement on her social-media account from a well-known Israeli newspaper reporting on findings of mortality rates related to the COVID-19 vaccinations used in Israel that the corporation permanently suspended her account.

Huber, a well-respected and licensed naturopathic medical doctor in Arizona, was accused of violating Twitter’s COVID-19 policy, the legal team explained.

“As the facts set forth in the complaint demonstrate, Twitter was in reality enforcing the Biden administration’s policy to silence anyone critical of COVID-19 vaccinations. Given the recent publication of the Twitter files outlining the White House-Twitter cozy censorship ‘partnership,’ the fact of an illegal conspiracy between the Biden administration and Twitter for Twitter to censor speech critical of the COVID vaccine policies on behalf of the government should surprise no one,” the organization reported.

The case originally was dismissed by a California court, in Twitter’s backyard.

But the complaint actually “sets forth material facts, which the court was required to accept as true at this stage of the litigation, clearly demonstrating the existence of the Biden/Twitter conspiracy to censor speech critical of the new and experimental COVID vaccinations (including the speech of Dr. Colleen Huber,” the team reported.

An appeal to the leftist 9th Circuit was unsuccessful, so now comes the filing with the Supreme Court.

That petition explains, “This case presents a constitutional challenge that asks how far may the government go utilizing private actors to censor speech of which the government disapproves. In contemporary times, this question takes on enormous consequences for liberty in general, political freedom in particular, and free speech most particularly. Large social media platforms and their concentration of economic power are relatively new to the law. Their unique ability to control the social and political messaging of public sentiment through hidden algorithms and even outright censorship has become a battleground for those in different and even adversarial political camps.”