The United States Constitution is something of a miracle. But unless we defend it, it’s just a piece of paper.

These are the words of Dr Aaron Kheriaty, a plaintiff in Missouri v. Biden, a federal free speech case that has reverberated globally.

In short, a swathe of federal agencies, in collusion with the Biden White House, spent years pressuring social media platforms to deprive Americans of their right to speak freely — on topics ranging from the Hunter Biden laptop scandal to the origins of COVID-19 to the integrity of the 2020 election.

The states of Missouri and Louisiana, led by Missouri’s former attorney general and current US Senator Eric Schmitt, took the US government to court and have secured a historic — if temporary — victory against the forces of censorship.

The presiding judge, Terry A. Doughty, conspicuously used July 4th — the United States’ national holiday and a day when federal rulings are seldom issued — to send a message about freedom the Biden administration cannot ignore:

“If the allegations made by Plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history.”

Though more developments are expected in this case, not least because the defendants have already filed an intent to appeal, the result thus far is promising: Doughty has issued a preliminary injunction preventing the US government from ordering Big Tech to police speech on their platforms.

Ceasing censorship

On his Substack, Kheriaty could barely contain his elation, rejoicing that the judge “granted nearly all the provisions in our request, placing strict limits around any communication between government officials and social media companies”.

Judge Doughty’s 155-page ruling is a thing of beauty — at least in the eyes of any still interested in the US Constitution’s First Amendment. Consider just one red-hot excerpt, which has independent outlets buzzing worldwide:

“Although this case is still relatively young, and at this stage the Court is only examining it in terms of the Plaintiffs’ likelihood of success on the merits, the evidence produced thus far depicts an almost dystopian scenario. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a period perhaps best characterized by widespread doubt and uncertainty, the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian 'Ministry of Truth'.

The Plaintiffs have presented substantial evidence in support of their claims that they were the victims of a far-reaching and widespread censorship campaign. This court finds that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their First Amendment free speech claim against the Defendants.”

In summarising the case, Judge Doughty listed a dizzying array of failings and alleged scandals the Biden regime did not want Americans questioning: Big Tech’s suppression of Hunter Biden’s laptop contents on the eve of the 2020 election; the lab-leak theory of COVID-19’s origin; the inefficiency of masks, lockdowns and COVID-19 vaccines; election security issues including voting by mail; and the Biden economy.