US Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Monday expressed concern that the US Constitution is restraining the federal government, appearing particularly troubled by the First Amendment.
Jackson made the remarks during oral arguments in Murthy vs. Missouri, where the Biden administration is arguing for the right to pressure social media companies into censoring American taxpayers. The government hopes to overturn a ruling last year from US District Judge Terry Doughty which banned the practice.
After hearing about the federal government’s efforts to censor Americans on COVID-19 and the 2020 election, Doughty determined on July 4th that “the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth’” and may be responsible for “the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history.”
But Biden appointee Ketanji Brown Jackson appears poised to vote against Doughty’s ruling, saying she is worried the First Amendment may rein in the federal government from censoring taxpayers.
“My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways in the most important time periods,” Jackson told Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga.
“You seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information. So, can you help me?” the Supreme Court justice continued. “Because I’m really worried about that because you’ve got the First Amendment operating in an environment of threatening circumstances, from the government’s perspective, and you’re saying that the government can’t interact with the source of those problems.”
Jackson mentioned COVID-19 as an example of a “threatening circumstance” that requires the government to step in and curb free speech, as it did.
In an interview Monday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) commented on Jackson’s remarks and said restraining the federal government is the very purpose of the US Constitution.
“She said you’ve got the First Amendment ‘hamstringing the government.’ Well, that’s what it’s supposed to do, for goodness sake,” Jordan said. “It was literally one of the craziest things I’ve ever seen, that you could have a Supreme Court Justice say that in the oral argument made no sense to me.
“That is frightening because if she really believes that, that is scary where we are heading. Understand what took place here. This was censorship by surrogate. This was big government telling Big Tech to take down speech that they disagreed with, and it was the most fundamental kind of speech. It was political speech.”
