BY Benjamin ClarkJuly 10, 2024
2 weeks ago
 | July 10, 2024
2 weeks ago

Biden Administration Seeks To Overturn RFK Jr. Injunction Following Court Ruling

The Biden administration is seeking to lift restrictions on controlling anti-vaccine commentary by independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on social media platforms.

According to Newsweek, the recent Supreme Court decision has empowered the administration to challenge an earlier injunction that favored Kennedy, setting the stage for a pivotal First Amendment showdown.

Origins of the Kennedy vs. Biden Battle

Earlier this year, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is also a candidate in the upcoming 2024 presidential election, won a legal injunction in a Louisiana court. This February ruling prevented his anti-vaccine statements from being erased from social platforms.

Kennedy’s actions drew support, particularly from conservative circles and several Republican states, who saw this as a battle against perceived federal overreach on free speech rights.

The case quickly became a touchstone in discussions about government influence and internet freedom. Kennedy argued that the administration was unfairly stifling his freedom to express dissenting views on vaccine safety and efficacy, a claim that resonated with a broad spectrum of free speech advocates.

A Shift in Legal Winds Post Supreme Court Decision

However, the legal landscape shifted following a Supreme Court decision on June 26 in Murthy v. Missouri.

The court ruled that states and individuals do not have the standing to sue administration officials over guidelines issued to social media platforms around COVID-19 content. This decision directly impacted the dynamics of the Kennedy v. Biden case.

Influenced by this Supreme Court ruling, the Biden administration has renewed its efforts to challenge Kennedy's injunction. On Monday, attorneys from the Department of Justice, including the U.S. Attorney General, filed a plea in the Louisiana court that initially granted Kennedy's injunction.

They requested a dissolution of the injunction, arguing the cases were almost identical and that the precedent set by the Supreme Court made it advisable to re-examine and potentially overturn the previous decision.

Government's Legal Strategies and Arguments

The government’s legal team emphasized that the logic used by the Supreme Court in dismissing the plaintiffs' standing in the Missouri case should also apply to Kennedy and his supporters. They argued that there was a lack of concrete evidence demonstrating government coercion in the moderation practices of social media companies.

In their legal briefs, Department of Justice lawyers highlighted, "The Supreme Court's conclusion that the plaintiffs in Murthy v. Missouri ... failed to establish ... standing applies equally to the Kennedy Plaintiffs."

They suggested that the evidence did not convincingly show that the government had compelled social media platforms to act against Kennedy.

The government also pointed out the overly broad nature of the injunction, which, as stated in their filings, "covers defendants who had nothing to do with the COVID-19-related posts and applies universally, across all posts and platforms."

This broad application, they argued, was another key reason for reassessing the injunction’s appropriateness in light of the recent Supreme Court guidance.

The Broader Context and Implications of This Legal Fight

The dispute between Kennedy and the Biden administration is not just a standalone legal battle but reflects wider national debates over censorship, free speech, and the role of government in regulating online discourse. This case critically tests the boundaries between government policy and individual freedoms in the digital age.

As the legal proceedings move forward, Kennedy supporters and advocacy groups wary of government overreach will be watching closely.

The outcome of this legal confrontation could potentially impact how free speech is treated on digital platforms, where much of today's political discourse unfolds.

In conclusion, this legal contest between the Biden administration and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. encapsulates significant constitutional questions about free speech and government influence over social media. As the case progresses, its resolution will offer new benchmarks for the interplay of law, policy, and individual rights in digital communication.

Written by: Benjamin Clark



Senator Cardin Takes Charge For Netanyahu's Congressional Address, Kamala Harris Will Not Attend

In an exceptional shift from routine, Senator Ben Cardin will preside over the upcoming joint session of Congress, not Vice President Kamala Harris. The session,…
49 mins ago
 • By Benjamin Clark

Trump Claims No Prior Warning Before Pennsylvania Rally Shooting

Former President Donald Trump experienced a harrowing close call when a would-be assassin shot him in the ear during a public appearance. In a disturbing…
52 mins ago
 • By Benjamin Clark

Justice Department Lied About Possession Of Biden Transcripts With Biographer As Part Of Classified Documents Probe

The Justice Department recently corrected its initial denial and acknowledged the existence of President Biden's interview transcripts after scrutiny over their handling of classified documents.…
2 hours ago
 • By Benjamin Clark

Obama Withholds Endorsement For Harris, Seems To Want Open Convention

Former President Barack Obama and other major Democrats have refrained from endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris for the presidency in the upcoming election according to…
2 hours ago
 • By Benjamin Clark

Supreme Court Denies Rehearing For Dozens Of Cases

The Supreme Court has once again upheld its decision to not reconsider nearly 30 cases that had previously been denied. This rare judicial action underscores…
2 hours ago
 • By Benjamin Clark


We publish the objective news, period. If you want the facts, then sign up below and join our movement for objective news:



    Get news from American Digest in your inbox.

      By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: American Digest, 3000 S. Hulen Street, Ste 124 #1064, Fort Worth, TX, 76109, US, You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact.
      Christian News Alerts is a conservative Christian publication. Share our articles to help spread the word.