Federal appeals judge: Facebook’s CENSORSHIP of RFK Jr. and Children’s Health Defense directly benefited government

08/15/2024 / By Ramon Tomey

Facebook’s censorship of Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and its chairman Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.) directly benefited the U.S. government, according to a federal appeals court judge.

The dissenting opinion by Judge Daniel Collins of the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court (NCAC) formed part of a ruling this month, which dismissed the health freedom group’s lawsuit against Facebook. The initial lawsuit was filed in 2020 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California but was dismissed in June 2021.

CHD appealed to the NCAC, with oral arguments taking place in May 2022. The group also presented a series of motions to the appellate court that indicated similar First Amendment violations on the part of Washington and its collusion with social media platforms such as Meta Platforms, Facebook’s parent, to censor content. But the appellate court ruled that CHD failed to prove “state action” influenced Meta’s decision to censor content by the group and RFK Jr., now an independent presidential candidate after taking leave from CHD.

“CHD failed to meet the first requirement for state action because the source of [its] alleged harm was Meta’s own policy of censoring, not any provision of federal law,” the majority ruling started. “The evidence suggested that Meta had independent incentives to moderate content and exercised its own judgment in so doing.”

But Collins begged to differ in his dissenting opinion. He wrote: “Meta’s interactions with the government with respect to the suppression of specific categories of vaccine-related speech, and in particular the speech of CHD and its founder and chairman [RFK Jr.], sufficed to implicate the First Amendment.”

The magistrate also pushed back against the idea that Meta censored content of its own volition. According to him, government pressure on the company to comply was backed up by the plausible threat of Meta being stripped of the immunity shield it enjoys under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996.

Collins urges court to consider new evidence submitted by CHD

According to the Defender, the NCAC’s majority opinion appears to not have considered the motions filed by CHD. In contrast, these motions “formed a substantial portion of Collins’ dissenting opinion.”

One such instance the magistrate cited was a private email sent by former White House Digital Strategy Director Rob Flaherty to Meta. The official “pointedly complained that Meta was not doing enough to ‘stop the Disinfo Dozen,’ which was a clear reference to CHD and [RFK Jr.].”

Flaherty’s “Disinfo Dozen” remark pertained to the Disinformation Dozen, a list of people who challenged the U.S. government’s Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) narrative and vaccine-related policies. The list of 12 developed by the British nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate included RFK Jr., Dr. Joseph Mercola, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, the late Dr. Rashid Buttar and Zelenko Freedom Foundation Co-Chair Kevin Jenkins.

“Under the unique circumstances of this case, I agree with CHD that we should take judicial notice of the existence of certain new, highly relevant documents that have only become recently available. [These documents also] effectively reflect specific additional factual allegations that CHD proposes to plead if it is given leave to amend on a remand,” Collins wrote.

“In my view, given the weighty First Amendment interests at stake in this case and the considerable difficulties inherent in attempting to uncover facts concerning alleged behind-the-scenes interactions between Meta and government personnel, we should exercise our discretion in favor of considering the significance of the additional allegations CHD could make in light of these newly available documents.”

CHD CEO Mary Holland told the Defender that she was pleased over the NCAC’s decision not being unanimous. The group is now considering other legal options, including petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case – potentially on the basis that the NCAC’s majority ruling did not take CHD’s new evidence into consideration. (Related: Historic lawsuits begin: Facebook must be held accountable for colluding with government to silence voices of truth.)

Head over to MetaTyranny.com for similar stories.

Listen to the Health Ranger Mike Adams explaining why censorship is violence against humanity in the clip below.

This video is from the Health Ranger Report channel on Brighteon.com.