Free Republic

One scarcely knows where to begin in documenting the errors, scandals, and misadventures of Justin Trudeau’s Liberal regime. The problem is, one scarcely knows where to end. The outrages just keep on coming. Advertisement Trudeau has come in for much caustic criticism of late, as a growing number of ordinary citizens and the independent media have expressed their justified suspicion and resentment of an overbearing and increasingly despotic administration. The issues at stake are features, not bugs. The list of noxious measures, lapses, and deeds that tarnish Trudeau’s record include: 1. the selling-out of Canada’s national identity 2. the daunting...

High school students at a New York high school staged a massive walk-out protest this week in opposition to the district’s attempts to force them to share restrooms with the opposite gender, in the name of “transgender” acceptance.Breitbart reports that the Wappingers Central School District, which oversees John Jay High School and other campuses, is set to allow students to choose whichever restrooms they want to use, rather than assigning them on the basis of their actual gender.The protest consisted entirely of students who do not support the policy, with one student, Shauna Neilan, saying that “a bunch of people...

Federal prosecutors are pursuing a deal to allow WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to avoid espionage charges and instead plead guilty to the misdemeanor of mishandling classified data. The Wall Street Journal first reported on the talks between U.S. authorities and Assange's lawyers on Wednesday. The independent outlet Consortium News then confirmed that it had learned the same details "off the record" several months ago. Assange has been detained in Britain for five years awaiting extradition, and the Journal reported that he "would likely be free to leave prison shortly after any deal was concluded" due to time served. Although it's...

It is obviously un-American for the government to develop a ‘hit list’ of citizens to mute in the public square through secret pressure on communications monopolies. The Biden administration attempted to distract the Supreme Court from the voluminous evidence of federal abuse of Americans’ speech rights during oral arguments in Murthy v. Missouri Monday. It sounded like several justices followed the feds’ waving red flag.“The government may not use coercive threats to suppress speech, but it is entitled to speak for itself by informing, persuading, or criticizing private speakers,” said Biden administration lawyer Brian Fletcher in his opening remarks. He...

Murthy v. Missouri perfectly illustrates the dangers of censorship, but Justice Jackson still thinks the government’s ‘perspective’ of ‘threatening circumstances’ should matter.. Following Monday’s Supreme Court oral argument in the social media censorship case Murthy v. Missouri, outraged free-speech advocates rightfully excoriated Justice Kentanji Brown Jackson for worrying that the First Amendment will “hamstring[] the government in significant ways in the most important time periods.” Given that “hamstringing” the federal government was precisely the purpose of the Bill of Rights, Justice Jackson’s comment laid bare the fundamental disdain she and other politically liberal justices hold for the classically liberal freedoms...

Free speech is the last exit ramp before political violence. During oral arguments before the Supreme Court in Murthy v. Missouri — a dispute that Senator Rand Paul rightly calls “the most consequential free speech case in U.S. history” — Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed concern that the First Amendment is “hamstringing the government in significant ways, in the most important time periods.” As with so much of the U.S. Constitution — and specifically the Bill of Rights — that has gotten in the way of the federal government’s march toward absolute power, a foundational American right is now in...

There was a bit of good news about the future of public discourse this week. The United States Supreme Court, even though stacked with right-wingers, sounded like it was ready to give the Biden administration the go-ahead to try to persuade social-media platforms not to put out content promoting nonsense about the presidential election, conspiracy theories about the pandemic and other assorted bilge and crackpottery... When other communications revolutions like the printing press, radio, and television came along, they were still largely controlled by the elites. But when the internet came along, regulatory bodies like Canada’s CRTC backed off. It...

@TuckerCarlson Ep. 82 Joe Biden has put hundreds of his political opponents in jail. Here’s the latest, a working journalist who’s exposed the fraudulence of the January 6th myth.

The Language of Force: How the Police State Muzzles Our Right to Speak Truth to Power“If the state could use [criminal] laws not for their intended purposes but to silence those who voice unpopular ideas, little would be left of our First Amendment liberties, and little would separate us from the tyrannies of the past or the malignant fiefdoms of our own age. The freedom to speak without risking arrest is ‘one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation.’”—Justice Neil Gorsuch, dissenting, Nieves v. Bartlett (2019)Tyrants don’t like people who speak truth to power.Cue the rise...

A small-town political feud that wound up with a Texas city council member behind bars is headed to the Supreme Court this week, where justices will consider whether the councilwoman can sue city leaders for politically motivated retaliation. "I would never believe that I would be going to the Supreme Court," Sylvia Gonzalez told Fox News. "I would never believe that I was in jail either." "In America, we don't arrest our critics," IJ attorney Anya Bidwell said. Gonzalez's story began in 2019 when the then-72-year-old retiree won a seat on the Castle Hills City Council. She said constituents had...

This morning the Supreme Court held oral argument in the case that is now styled Murthy v. Missouri. C-SPAN has posted audio of the oral argument here. The case arises from the government’s “encouragement” of censorship by the social media platforms, as documented in the Twitter Files. We have followed the case as it has wended its way through the district court to the Fifth Circuit and then to the Supreme Court. We (I) have been pulling for the plaintiffs. The Supreme Court has already entered an order staying the narrowed preliminary injunction that had been fashioned by the Fifth...

This afternoon, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) tweeted about today’s US Supreme Court case (Murthy v. Missouri) that involves several plaintiffs, including The Gateway Pundit, who have been harmed by censorship by the government and big tech. In his tweet, Senator Rand Paul wrote: Today, SCOTUS heard Murthy v. Missouri, the most consequential free speech case in U.S. history. This isn’t just about social media companies; it’s a critical examination of government overreach. The Biden administration and FBI’s efforts to influence Big Tech into silencing dissent tramples on the 1st Amendment. Our focus must be on preventing government censorship, not compelling...

Free speech is on trial at the Supreme Court, but Justice Kentanji Brown Jackson is no fan of the First Amendment. The Constitution, you see, limits the government. But leftists want unlimited government — which is why they hate the Constitution. During Monday’s oral arguments for Murthy v. Missouri, formerly known as Biden v. Missouri, Jackson claimed to oppose any ruling in favor of Americans’ constitutional right to free speech if it limited the government’s ability to censor that speech via Big Tech. “My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways...

the appeals panel agreed that several federal offices and agencies, including the White House .. violated the First Amendment by coercing the platforms’ content moderation decisions. ... A federal appeals court ... finding that several agencies likely violated the First Amendment. ... The original case was brought by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, who alleged that federal officials unduly pressured social media firms to limit speech on their platforms, as they communicated concerns about posts related to the Covid pandemic or elections. ... The decision had an immediate impact. Following the district court’s order in July, the State...

@TheChiefNerd “The bill poses significant risk of being Patriot Act 2.0…There’s no way to argue this language isn’t vague and could invite abuse…An Elon or a Trump or you take Rumble for example, which is also accused of being a Russian agent, they could be forced to divest the company or have it be banned.”

@RandPaul The House TikTok Ban is not securing our nation—it's a disturbing gift of unprecedented authority to President Biden and the Surveillance State that threatens the very core of American digital innovation and free expression.

Twenty-three Democrat run states and the District of Columbia, the home of our nation’s capital, filed amicus briefs in support of government censorship and banning of free speech in the United States. These 23 states and the District of Columbia filed amicus briefs in support of the Biden administration in the SCOTUS case is Murthy, et al v. Missouri, et al, 23-411 (Missouri v. Biden) case. The states essentially argue that they have an interest in collaborating with tech companies to “encourage” the public to behave themselves and “discourage” the public from believing alleged “disinformation” or engaging in online predatory...

It is often brushed aside as conspiracy theory. But call it Deep State, reincarnated Illuminati, or the New World Order, it is becoming increasingly evident that extremely powerful and invisible networks are trying to influence how global events unfold. Whether it is a farmers’ protest in India’s Punjab or defending the police and pushing underage gender surgeries in the US to opposing narcotics control legislations in Uganda, there is always shadowy funding and publicity through NGOs, academia and chosen media outlets. The Narendra Modi government has banned more than 20,000 NGOs. These were siphoning off money, dodging foreign currency regulations,...

The Canadian government is proposing a bill that would raise the maximum punishment for online hate speech from five years to a life sentence. The proposal forms part of the latest Online Harms Bill, put forward by Justin Trudeau's left-wing government, which seeks to its assert control over online discourse: The National Post reports: "Bill C-63 aims to force social-media, user-uploaded adult content and live-streaming services to reduce exposure to online content deemed harmful, to strengthen the reporting of child pornography and to better address hate propaganda and provide recourse to victims of hate online. "It also amends the Criminal...

The United States government has been pouring millions of tax dollars into developing AI-powered tools to censor and blacklist dissent voices. This month, the House Judiciary’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government Committee revealed that the U.S. government is funding AI censorship technology via the National Science Foundation (NSF) to censor political debate on social media platforms.