An Inflection Point in the War Against the Censorship Industrial Complex

In the past 10 days, three major developments have thrust the debate over online censorship back into the national spotlight and could mark an inflection point in the battle to protect free speech.

First, last Wednesday, 136 journalists, writers, and academics from across the political spectrum united to publish what they called the “Westminster Declaration,” a warning to political leaders and everyday citizens alike about “increasing international censorship that threatens to erode centuries-old democratic norms.”

Signatories included “Twitter Files” authors Michael Shellenberger and Matt Taibbi, conservative psychologist and author Jordan Peterson, liberal biologist Richard Dawkins, and liberal filmmaker Oliver Stone, among others.

Two days after the publication of the Westminster Declaration, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it would hear Murthy v. Missouri, formerly known as Missouri v. Biden, a landmark case brought by the Attorneys General of Missouri and Louisiana challenging the government’s right to collude with social media companies to censor Americans’ speech online.

And finally, earlier this week, Republicans elected Congressman Mike Johnson as the next Speaker of the House. Johnson notably hails from Louisiana – the same state as one of the plaintiffs in the Missouri case – and has previously grilled top Biden officials on their censorship activities.

Taken together, these developments signal a brewing disaster scenario for the unholy alliance of Big Tech “content moderators,” government bureaucrats, and left-wing activists – what Shellenberger and Taibbi have dubbed “the Censorship Industrial Complex.” Not only are noteworthy self-described liberals turning on the left’s censorship regime, but the Supreme Court may also be on the cusp of establishing a new legal precedent explicitly prohibiting the government from working with Big Tech to silence speech, and the House of Representatives now has a speaker who is an expert in constitutional law and is fully willing to call out censorship.

Despite virtually every mainstream media outlet predictably ignoring the Westminster Declaration, it is nonetheless an extraordinary document. It points specifically to actions taken by governments in the United States and throughout the world to censor and even criminalize political speech.

“Through deplatforming and flagging, social media censors have already silenced lawful opinions on topics of national and geopolitical importance,” the declaration reads. “They have done so with the full support of ‘disinformation experts’ and ‘fact-checkers’ in the mainstream media, who have abandoned the journalistic values of debate and intellectual inquiry.”

“We recognize that words can sometimes cause offence, but we reject the idea that hurt feelings and discomfort, even if acute, are grounds for censorship,” the document continues. “We must strenuously protect speech for the views that we most strongly oppose. Only in the public square can these views be heard and properly challenged.”

The Westminster Declaration also specifically calls on governments and internet companies to uphold and protect the right to freedom of opinion and expression outlined in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

“In the course of human history, attacks on free speech have been a precursor to attacks on all other liberties,” the signatories warn. “Regimes that eroded free speech have always inevitably weakened and damaged other core democratic structures. In the same fashion, the elites that push for censorship today are also undermining democracy.”

On its own, the Westminster Declaration might be an admirable but ultimately toothless effort to stop the march of the Censorship Industrial Complex. But the Supreme Court’s decision to hear Murthy v. Missouri could add some legal muscle behind the calls to action in the declaration.

Lower courts have already ruled that the Biden administration likely violated the First Amendment by working directly with social media companies to remove content that the White House disagreed with and ban the users who posted it. In September, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled that the White House, the CDC, and the FBI “likely coerced or significantly encouraged social-media platforms to moderate content” and in doing so, unlawfully censored speech.

Evidence in the case shows that Biden administration employees and career bureaucrats at agencies including the FBI routinely sent requests to social media companies to censor certain posts and accounts – requests which were, more often than not, swiftly granted. In some cases, the government asked online platforms to ban satire accounts that were obviously poking fun at the administration rather than trying to spread “disinformation.”

The Court is expected to hear evidence in the case this term, which ends next June. Given the current 6-3 conservative majority, free speech proponents have reason to be optimistic for a favorable ruling.

That ruling could be bolstered by congressional action under Speaker Johnson. With command of the House hearing schedule, Biden administration officials could suddenly find themselves facing a withering barrage of questioning about and investigations into their censorship activities.

During a hearing this year, Johnson, citing U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty’s initial ruling in the Missouri case, slammed Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for the actions of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) which has been at the center of the censorship controversy.

“The court found specifically – it’s a finding of fact that is not disputed by the government defendants, the Biden administration, your agency, the FBI or DHS,” Johnson said. “So don’t stand there and tell me under oath that you only focused on adversaries around the world, foreign actors. That’s not true.”

When the Court does issue its ruling, one way or another, it will be a major turning point in the war against the Censorship Industrial Complex. With developments like the Westminster Declaration and Johnson’s election as Speaker, the days of the government censoring Americans at will with virtually no accountability could be numbered.

Shane Harris is a writer and political consultant from Southwest Ohio. You can follow him on Twitter @ShaneHarris513.