Corporate entities operating as private actors are using unchecked power to infringe on the free speech of the people under the guise of community guidelines.
One example is the recent policy of FaceBook to censor content, and remove users in order to avoid possible legal ramifications of any Government regulation that may exist.
According to the Supreme court in Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., 500 U.S. 614 (1991), "Although the conduct of private parties lies beyond the Constitution's scope in most instances, governmental authority may dominate an activity to such an extent that its participants must be deemed to act with the authority of the government and, as a result, be subject to constitutional constraints."
The first Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Congress did just that when they recently made it legal to censor and discriminate against the demographic described as, "Q-anon white supremacist conspiracy theorists". Although this label is not accurate, and may only describe a tiny segment of the entire affected demographic, this, "Instance of Governmental Authority", has been cited as the cause for these actors to create discriminatory policy that is subject to constitutional restraints.
The new censorship policies are used to not only remove Q-anon voices; but any others that dispute mass media propaganda, religious free speech, or any attempt to organize petition the Government for a redress of grievances. In Edmondson, the Supreme Court wrote that, "discrimination, though invidious in all contexts, violates the Constitution only when it may be attributed to state action."
Both houses of congress are responsible for this assault on the first amendment, and the recent POTUS did not veto it.
Therefore it should be clear that the actions of Google, FaceBook, and others may be shown that for the "State Action Requirement" showing that a plaintiff having standing to sue over the law being broken, has been achieved because we can show that the Government was responsible for the violation, rather than a private actor.
The purpose of this effort is to extract damages, force upon social media corporate entities responsibility for complying with constitutional constraints, and to begin the restoration of all of our constitutionally guaranteed first amendment rights
Email [email protected] for more information on how to participate in restoration of our rights, and compensation for violation of said rights.
FREE email alerts of the most important BANNED videos in the world
Get FREE email alerts of the most important BANNED videos in the world that are usually blacklisted by YouTube, Facebook, Google, Twitter and Vimeo. Watch documentaries the techno-fascists don't want you to know even exist. Join the free Brighteon email newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time. 100% privacy protected.
Your privacy is protected. Subscription confirmation required.