RFK Jr. Gains Legal Ground Against Biden in Censorship Dispute

A recent court decision permits Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to proceed with a lawsuit against the Biden administration, alleging anti-vaccine censorship.

At a Glance

A federal judge ruled Kennedy can sue over claims of censorship.
Judge Doughty believes Kennedy is likely to succeed in his claims.
The lawsuit involves alleged government pressure on social media platforms.
The focus is on upholding free speech amidst public health concerns.

Court Allows Kennedy to Sue Over Censorship Claims

On August 24, 2024, a federal judge ruled that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. can sue the Biden administration for allegedly censoring his charity, Children’s Health Defense (CHD). The case stems from accusations that the administration pressured social media companies to remove posts questioning vaccine safety. Judge Terry Doughty of the U.S. District Court stated that Kennedy is likely to succeed on his claim that government actions led to content suppression.

In his ruling, Judge Doughty referenced the Supreme Court’s decision in Murthy v. Missouri, which also involved claims of government pressure on social media. Unlike the Murthy case, where the Court found insufficient evidence, Doughty identified direct links between government actions and social media censorship of CHD’s content. This ruling potentially sets a precedent for future cases on government influence over online platforms.

‘LIKELY TO SUCCEED’: A judge ruled that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. can sue the Biden-Harris administration over alleged social media censorship of his Children’s Health Defense charity. Why the court believes Kennedy’s lawsuit has merit: https://t.co/9jOxBwHOsX pic.twitter.com/wrpRGMfV1W

— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 25, 2024

Details of the Allegations

The lawsuit filed by Kennedy and CHD alleges that the government coerced companies like Facebook, X, and YouTube to flag and remove posts labeled as misinformation. According to Judge Doughty, this governmental influence likely led to the suppression of content critical of COVID-19 vaccine mandates and lockdown measures. The charity claims its mission is to end childhood health epidemics by eliminating toxic exposure, a stance their critics label as “anti-vaccine.”

“The Court finds that Kennedy is likely to succeed on his claim that suppression of content posted was caused by actions of Government Defendants, and there is a substantial risk that he will suffer similar injury in the near future,” Doughty commented.

Kim Mack Rosenberg, CHD’s general counsel, praised the ruling as the correct conclusion on standing for Kennedy and the charity. She emphasized that the court acknowledged the direct impact of government actions on their ability to communicate on social media, a recognition absent in the Murthy case.

Judge rules RFK Jr. can sue Biden administration over alleged censorship of charity that questions vaccines https://t.co/aaL3qNVzAQ

— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 25, 2024

Impact and Broader Implications

The case will return to a lower court to review the injunction’s specifics. The ruling came just before RFK Jr. suspended his presidential campaign and endorsed former President Trump. This case could have wide-reaching implications for the future regulation of controversial online content and government interaction with social media companies.

“Judge Terry Doughty carefully and clearly analyzed the law and facts and applied the framework from the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Murthy v. Missouri regarding standing,” said CHD general counsel Kim Rosenberg.

In the broader legal landscape, this ruling is significant as it accentuates the judiciary’s stance on managing free speech rights against public health directives. This case could influence how tech companies moderate content moving forward and determine the extent of governmental oversight permissible in the realm of social media.