RFK Jr. Wins Right to Sue Government Over Censorship

In a significant development in anti-censorship litigation, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty ruled in favor of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his charity, Children’s Health Defense (CHD), allowing them to proceed with their case against the Biden administration. This ruling contrasts sharply with the Supreme Court's June decision in Murthy v. Missouri, where a 6-3 majority dismissed a similar case, citing the plaintiffs' lack of standing due to insufficient evidence linking government actions to content moderation on social media. Judge Doughty, appointed by former President Donald Trump, determined that Kennedy and CHD met the legal criteria for standing, noting that they had been directly censored on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. Doughty’s 20-page decision highlighted evidence of direct communications from government officials requesting the suppression of Kennedy's content, indicating a substantial risk of future injury to their ability to communicate online. The ruling underscores a critical distinction from the Murthy case, where the Supreme Court found that the plaintiffs could not adequately demonstrate a direct connection between government actions and their alleged censorship. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, emphasized that while the government played a role in content moderation, social media platforms had independent reasons for their actions. Doughty’s decision reflects a broader concern regarding government efforts to combat what it deems misinformation, particularly surrounding COVID-19. This case may set a precedent for future litigation regarding the intersection of government influence and free speech on social media platforms.