In a big week for the Supreme Court, the justices heard several cases involving the First Amendment. Arguments in a case involving government censorship sparked a viral backlash after Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson appeared to suggest government collusion with social media companies could be justified. On Wednesday's “America's Newsroom,” Fox News contributor and constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley expressed concern about Judge Jackson's “chilling” comments.
JUDGE JACKSON MISSING DUE TO 'CONCERN' FIRST AMENDMENT COULD 'STOP THE GOVERNMENT' AT COVID CENSORSHIP HEARING
JONATHAN TURLEY: In fact, there are important First Amendment cases here. As someone associated with the free speech community, we are all nervous. It was chilling in the social media case to hear judges like Jackson repeatedly say: What's the problem with the government coercing speech? Why shouldn't they, when there are really worrying periods… like in the pandemic? And a lot of us were really dumbfounded by that, because a lot of what the government did in terms of censorship was wrong. Many things that were being censored, by scientists who were fired, disciplined and excluded from social networks, in some cases. Ultimately, they were vindicated for issues such as the origin of the virus. [in a Chinese lab], showing that it is not just a possibility, many consider it the main possibility. School closures. They were vindicated in many of those things. And yet, Jackson said: I don't see why the government can't coerce social media. So we're all very concerned about where the government will land there.
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who couldn't define the word “woman” when asked at her confirmation hearing last year, is now under scrutiny for her dissent in a landmark decision rejecting affirmative action. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
The Supreme Court heard Murthy v. Missouri on Monday, a case that challenges the Biden administration's alleged coordination with Big Tech to censor certain messages.
The case arose from a lawsuit filed by the Republican-led states of Missouri and Louisiana, which accused high-ranking government officials of working with social media companies “under the guise of combating disinformation” that ultimately led to censoring speech about issues including Hunter Biden's laptop. The origins of COVID-19 and the effectiveness of face masks, which states said were a violation of the First Amendment.
As the justices questioned whether the Biden administration crossed the constitutional line, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson appeared to suggest that such actions may be justified.
“My biggest concern is that your opinion holds that the First Amendment significantly cripples the federal government in the most important periods of time,” he told the attorney representing Louisiana, Missouri and private plaintiffs.
JUDGE JACKSON MISSED FOR WORRYING ABOUT FIRST AMENDMENT 'FOR' GOVERNMENT: 'LITERALLY THE POINT'
“And so I suppose some might say that the government actually has a duty to take action to protect the citizens of this country, and you seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring to platforms to remove harmful activities. information,” he continued.
“So can you help me? Because I'm really… I'm really concerned about that because you have the First Amendment operating in an environment of threatening circumstances from the government's perspective, and you're saying that the government can.” “I don't interact with the source of those problems,” Jackson added.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
His comments quickly went viral, with dozens of people insisting that “crippling the federal government” is “literally the goal” of the First Amendment.
Fox News' Lindsey Kornick and Alexa Moutevelis contributed to this report.
