(Big League Politics) – U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle has issued a preliminary injunction overruling the Florida law to reign in Big Tech, claiming the measure violates the “free speech” of tech companies to implement the Orwellian nightmare.
“If a preliminary injunction is not issued, the plaintiffs’ members will sometimes be compelled to speak and will sometimes be forbidden from speaking, all in violation of their editorial judgment and the First Amendment,” Hinkle wrote.
“The tech companies would sometimes be forbidden from speaking because the Florida law’s definition of censorship includes not only deleting content, but also “post[ing] an addendum to any content or material posted by a user,” he added.
Hinkle sided with a trade group representing tech entities like Facebook and Twitter to overturn the will of the people. He said that the Florida law “compels providers to host speech that violates their standards—speech they otherwise would not host—and forbids providers from speaking as they otherwise would.”
“The Governor’s signing statement and numerous remarks of legislators show rather clearly that the legislation is viewpoint-based,” he said.
Hinkle concocted this ridiculous theory, essentially that the 1st Amendment was written to permit mass censorship by unaccountable corporate monoliths, in order to protect his political agenda. Hinkle is a liberal activist judge who was appointed to the bench by former President Bill Clinton and issued a ruling to undemocratically overturn Florida’s law banning gay marriage at the behest of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Big League Politics reported on the measure, which is actually quite moderate as banished journalist Laura Loomer has pointed out, shortly after it was passed and signed into law:
“Banished journalist and U.S. Congressional candidate Laura Loomer addressed the Florida state house on Monday to discuss problems with a proposed reform backed by Governor Ron DeSantis meant to tackle Big Tech censorship.
Loomer issued testimony before the House Appropriations Committee to state her concerns with House Bill 7013. She calls the measure a “bold first step to ensure the 1st Amendment rights of all Floridians are protected against the dangers Big Tech poses against free speech,” but feels the legislation needs additional provisions to fully address the problem.
“Effective bills have three strong pillars: clear definitions, effective protections, and strong punitive enforcements. In its current draft, the bill does not address candidates who were previously banned and deflatformed prior to running for office nor does it address current elected officials who could also be deplatformed,” she explained.
“Further, the bill does not appear to address penalties for telecommunication companies and internet service provider companies that similarly have been known to deplatform candidates, people, and business owners for simply having an opinion,” Loomer added…
Since the introduction of House Bill 7013 last month, Gov. DeSantis has been out giving speeches with pointed rhetoric against Big Tech.
“We’re going to shift the balance of power back to consumers and away from Big Tech, because Floridians are no longer going to be dictated to by those … companies,” DeSantis said. “We’re going to have a more balanced approach where consumers can, in part, control their most sensitive data.”
The legislation will need more work in order to neuter the tech monopolies.”
The courts, which also permitted grotesque election fraud last year, will not allow any challenges to Big Tech’s Draconian, politically-motivated, and anti-American censorship policies.