Freedom of speech and the press seems pretty straightforward. We are free to speak as we see fit. The press is free to report and opine on the events of the day as they see fit. The government is prohibited from interfering. You may lose your job over taking part in a KKK rally or a pro-Hamas protest, but unless violence is involved, you can't be imprisoned for it. As an old saying goes, your right to swing your fist stops at my nose. This principle seems pretty straightforward.

Amendment I: 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.

(Emphasis added by author.)

Why, then, is the federal government putting pressure on media companies to demonetize and otherwise punish content they see as threatening? It's gotten bad enough that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, along with media outlets The Daily Wire and The Federalist, has filed a lawsuit against the State Department to have it stopped.

The State of Texas and media companies The Daily Wire and The Federalist have sued the U.S. Department of State, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and other government officials for engaging in a conspiracy to censor, deplatform, and demonetize American media outlets disfavored by the federal government.

Through its Global Engagement Center, the State Department actively intervened in the news-media market to limit the reach and business viability of domestic news organizations by funding censorship technology and private censorship enterprises. Congress authorized creation of the Global Engagement Center expressly to counter foreign propaganda and misinformation. Instead, the agency weaponized this authority to violate the First Amendment and suppress Americans’ constitutionally-protected speech. The complaint describes the State Department’s project as “one of the most egregious government operations to censor the American press in the history of the nation.”

In other words, a branch of the federal government, under the control of the executive branch (the president), took a statute passed by Congress and twisted it out of all recognition to fulfill an illegal, unconstitutional agenda item. Why? To squash political opposition. There can be no other way to view this.

The lawsuit states in part:

As the lawsuit explains, The Daily Wire, The Federalist, and other conservative news organizations were “branded ‘unreliable’ or ‘risky’ by the government-funded and government-promoted censorship enterprises… starving them of advertising revenue and reducing the circulation of their reporting and speech—all as a direct result of [the State Department’s] unlawful censorship scheme.”

You can view the entire lawsuit filing here. 

This isn't just a matter of private companies exercising editorial discretion, mind you. This is an arm of the U.S. government, acting under the supposed authority of legislation duly passed by Congress. The executive branch, mind you, can take no action without the authorization of legislation passed by Congress; thus, the statement, "Congress shall make no law..." in the First Amendment. But here, the executive branch is taking the authorization well beyond what is intended; when the State Department is pressuring private media companies to take action against private citizens, that's chilling. That the State Department is setting itself up as the arbiter of what is "unreliable" or "risky" is horrifying. That, to paraphrase Mr. Hayek, is the road to serfdom.

That we enjoy freedoms and individual rights here in the United States that are routinely denied to people in most of the rest of the world should come as no surprise to anyone reading these words. Even the formerly Great Britain, one of the homes of the Enlightenment, is becoming increasingly intolerant of dissent. 

But here? In the supposed Land of the Free? All I can say to the media outlets here is to look at Elon Musk — he's moving, at least, in the right direction, even if slower than some of us would like.

The First Amendment is one of our nation's great treasures. It is a statement of a natural right — that we are free to speak our minds — and that the government cannot interfere with our free expression, no matter how horrible that expression may be. It does not shield us from any consequences of that speech, but it does prevent the government from interfering with free speech. There are plenty of cases where people can and should be fired for their speech, but the government, at any level, should not — must not — be involved in any such decision by a private company or any other non-governmental organization. 

It's good to see a state attorney general joining media companies in the fight. We will follow this lawsuit with great interest.