A Trump-appointed district court judge denied the administration’s request to pause his sweeping ruling preventing many government entities from flagging social media misinformation to the platforms Monday, claiming that those being “censored” suffered far a greater injury than the government.
There is no amendment about citizens’ right to read the truth.
It’s more important to protect lies.
There is a special variety of the truth that operates in parts of Texas and Louisiana, and this judge is determined to protect it from intrusion by the jackbooted thugs of the federal government.
claiming that those being “censored” suffered far a greater injury than the government
This is where standing based on being the one harmed can get a little weird. It’s not the government per se that’s being harmed by an inability to protect the public according to law, but rather the public
Years ago a comment was made in a SCOTUS hearing - effect was one judge said that a corporation is sufficiently dis-incentivized from selling dangerous products because of the damage it would do to its brand.
I guess they had never heard of re-branding.
Now it’s you cannot call out someone informing patrons that the smoke in the theater actually a fire?
So far as I know, the government is simply briefing the Social media companies on what the government believes is misinformation. Not compelling them to do anything.
Could the government simply have an open call for Social media companies to join if they want and share that information?
Is the next step petitioning the 5th Circuit for a stay pending appeal, and failing that the Supreme Court?
This is madness.
And when we get a working trifecta and eliminate the filibuster - seriously, it’s well past time - two of many things on the agenda are passing laws limiting injunctions to the district or circuit issuing them, and mandatory pools for single-judge districts.
Also on the agenda - in order:
The last two need to be written with strictly limited Court review - Congress can and has done this in the past.
Yes. Moving for the stay in the district court is generally a prerequisite to getting a stay pending appeal from the circuit court.
Not sure about the legality (it sounds like it could be “okay” based on the ruling), but moving to a pull-model from a push-model would require the social media companies to take an active role in participating. At least with the push model, they receive the info, even if they choose to ignore it. With an open phone call, they have to take the additional step to choose to have someone join the call.
May this be so! 
Exactly. It’s that conservative mindset that “the government” is some external, almost foreign entity rather than “we the people.”
1 / Pretty sure that Judge Doughty has never read Orwell. Misapplication of the “Orwellian” adjective suggests as much.
2 / Yet if he did, he surely did not understand him, since the GQP is as Orwellian as it gets in the current American System.
3 / It is gobsmacking that a Fed judge represents and promotes disinformation and its sordid effects. His reasoning is de facto approval of it as a useful political strategy.
These Trump/Sarandon judges are a farce. So posting misinformation is totally fine, but correcting misinformation is verboten, huh? Comrades Stalin and Putin have nothing on these MAGA-hattted robe-wearers.
So Joe should host a weekly “Major Malarkey w/ Dark Brandon” webcast, let all the Social media companies compete to host it each week… they will all want that ratings gold… 
Is it time to bring back the term “Activist Judges”? Applied to the current context.
Or he read 1984 as a User’s Guide rather than a dystopian novel.
It certainly seems that way for some on their side. See Newt and Frank Luntz in their heyday. They were very big on concepts that align closely with 2 + 2 = 5 and newspeak. They forged the way and now the majority of the party have adopted doublethink without…thinking.
Committed crackpot judges keep moving the legal Overton window; even if this one is overturned, it will take a while and it will set an example for others to emulate.
The original order was bad enough. But, this refusal makes it likelier that the appellate robes will stomp on this judge.
“thought-free doublethink.” 