Defending the Freedom of Speech

As Thomas Jefferson said, “a society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither.” By allowing ourselves to be corralled by fear, our liberties were stolen with a whisper. Here’s how we’re fighting to restore our First Amendment rights with the landmark case Louisiana and Missouri v. Biden:

Liz Murrill Talking

Fast Facts About Our Case

  • Originally known as Louisiana and Missouri v. Biden, this case went before the U.S. Supreme Court in March 2024 as Murthy v. Missouri (No. 23-411).
  • Freedom of speech is one of the most important liberties we have as Americans, serving as a bulwark to protect democracy from a government that might censor its people. However, our case has uncovered over 20,000 pages of documents — along with over 100 pages of fact findings by a district judge — highlighting an extensive censorship campaign stemming directly from the President of the United States and his federal government.
  • When George Orwell wrote Nineteen Eight-Four as a warning against tyranny, he never intended for it to be used as a how-to guide by the federal government. Yet evidence presented in our case demonstrates systematic political bias, with federal officials exerting control over what Americans can say on platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, particularly targeting conservative political speech. The court ruling in this case recognized the potential severity of the censorship, stating that it could involve the most massive attack against free speech in United States history.

What You Should Know:

  1. Government Coercion during the Pandemic:
    • Government restrictions during the pandemic severely limited economic choices and stifled dissenting voices.
    • These coercive mandates and censorship infringed upon fundamental liberties, undermining the essence of free speech.
  2. Historic Injunction Against Censorship:
    • Our efforts resulted in a historic injunction against federal agencies colluding with social media companies to censor protected speech.
    • The ruling exposed systematic political bias and massive attacks on conservative speech, holding government entities accountable for overreach.
  3. Threat to Online Freedom:
    • The case highlights the importance of preserving the Internet as a marketplace of ideas, fostering diverse viewpoints.
    • Biden’s censorship endeavors pose a significant threat to the freedoms facilitated by the digital sphere, aiming to control information and stifle dissent.
  4. Defending American Values:
    • Our fight transcends state boundaries, safeguarding freedom of speech for all Americans.
    • This case is pivotal in determining the future of free expression in the digital age, ensuring that individualism and diverse ideas prevail over government censorship.

Liz Murrill Speaking to Press

Our Timeline

May 5, 2022:

Louisiana and Missouri Attorney Generals filed suit at the United States Federal District Court for the Western District of LA

June 14, 2022:

Plaintiffs filed motion for a Preliminary Injunction, requesting related discovery as well

July 12, 2022:

Defendants filed Motion to Dismiss

September 2022:

The District Court granted limited discovery, which led to important discovery acquired from defendants, including Dr. Anthony Fauci and Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre

May 2023:

Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint

July 4, 2023:

The Court granted the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary injunction in part

July 5, 2023:

The Defendants filed Notice of Appeal

July 10, 2023:

Defendants requested an emergency stay on Judge Doughty’s Preliminary Injunction pending appeal to the Fifth Circuit

July 14, 2023:

The Fifth Circuit entered a temporary administrative stay on the Preliminary Injunction, expediting the appeal to the next available date for Oral Argument

August 10, 2023:

The Fifth Circuit heard Oral Arguments on the Defendants’ appeal of the District Court’s Preliminary Injunction

September 8, 2023:

The Fifth Circuit modified the injunction and affirmed the district court injunction against the WH, FBI, CDC, and Surgeon General only. The Fifth Circuit stayed its decision through Sept 18 to allow the Gov’t to seek SCOTUS review.

September 14, 2023:

The Gov’t requested a stay from SCOTUS or, alternatively, a writ of certiorari (review) of the Fifth Circuit decision. That same day, Justice Alito (as the Fifth Circuit Justice) issued an administrative stay of the injunction until Sept 22.

September 22, 2023:

Plaintiffs petitioned the Fifth Circuit for panel rehearing, arguing that the Fifth Circuit erroneously omitted CISA, GEC, the Election Integrity Partnership, and Virality Project from the injunction. That same day, Justice Alito extended the SCOTUS administrative stay until Sept 27.

September 25, 2023:

The Fifth Circuit granted plaintiffs’ petition for panel rehearing.

September 28, 2023:

SCOTUS notified the parties that it would not take action on the Gov’t stay application due to the Fifth Circuit grant of rehearing.

October 3, 2023:

The Fifth Circuit issued a revised opinion on rehearing and withdrew its original opinion dated Sept 8, adding CISA back to the injunction, along with the WH, FBI, CDC, and Surgeon General, but not including the GEC, Election Integrity Partnership, or Virality Project, and staying its decision.

October 20, 2023:

SCOTUS stayed the injunction issued by the Fifth Circuit and granted certiorari. Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissented from the grant of the stay of injunction.

March 18, 2023:

The U.S. Supreme Court heard our oral argument.

Latest News

What’s Happening in Our Case

Louisiana heads to the United States Supreme Court to defend our First Amendment rights against government censorship

Freedom of speech is one of the most important liberties we have as Americans, serving as a bulwark to protect democracy from a government that might censor its people.