Columbia News

Senator Eric Schmitt (R-MO) chaired a Senate Commerce Committee hearing to address concerns about government agencies under the Biden Administration allegedly pressuring technology companies to censor and silence Americans. The hearing focused on protecting free speech from what was described as government and Big Tech censors.

During his opening remarks, Senator Schmitt stated, "Our Founding Fathers recognized freedom of speech as vital, protecting it first and foremost in the Bill of Rights. While some argued that free speech was already protected because the Constitution did not give the government power to censor, the Framers went further, affirmatively restricting government intrusion. The First Amendment is the beating heart of our Constitution. Free speech is not just instrumental but an end in itself. In the digital age, with all the peril and possibility that accompanies it, the struggle for free speech is the struggle for civilization itself."

Senator Schmitt discussed findings from Missouri v. Biden, a lawsuit he filed as Missouri’s Attorney General, which he says revealed coordination between federal agencies and social media companies regarding content moderation during the COVID-19 pandemic. He said, "I mean, the truth of the matter is, what was uncovered [when] we took their deposition [during Missouri v Biden], the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] had approved words and phrases that social media companies could use. The secret portal that was established between the government and these social media companies convey this. And if people utter this phrase — I mean, this is sort of like prior restraint — this is what you will take down ahead of time. CISA [the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency] was very much involved in this. You have an alphabet soup of agencies most people have never heard of that were weaponized against millions of voices in this country. We talk about President Trump a lot, but there’s just a lot of people who were online, who had questions about forced masking of kids, or the vaccine mandate, all those sorts of things, and they were throttled or taken down. So, given what you know about organizations, like the Election Integrity Project, that’s another one, in collaboration with CISA and receive taxpayer funding. How are these NGOs [non-governmental organizations] still working currently to harm individuals from speaking their mind, particularly conservatives?"

Sean Davis, Chief Executive Officer of The Federalist, responded by saying: "Yeah, it’s a great question. The thing about these censorship tools and technologies and efforts is they’re a little bit like injecting something into the body’s bloodstream. They inject it in. It’s in there. It’s working its thing. And just because you pull the needle out doesn’t mean the effects are gone. A lot of these organizations are still out there using technologies and tools that were deliberately funded and distributed by the federal government for the purpose of censoring people like me, people like Alex Berenson, people like my colleague Molly Hemingway. I don’t know if we will ever actually be free of the effects of this censorship industrial complex that the previous administration created. I don’t know if we will ever be free of the horrible effect that it created, the horrible dampening and abridgment of our speech that we were forced to endure secretly for years, and the extent of which we still don’t fully know."

Schmitt also questioned independent journalist Alex Berenson about actions taken by CISA during this period: "Okay, in limited time, I want to [ask] Mr. Berenson, it’s clear now that during the Biden administration, CISA, which is mentioned a lot in this report obviously, operated kind of a switchboarding mechanism during this period, flagging disfavored content from domestic sources for social media platforms. Based on what you’ve seen, how is CISA specifically doing this? What was the abuse really all about?"

Berenson replied: "Well again I think you laid it out. They redefined infrastructure you know so it wasn’t actual physical infrastructure or software infrastructure. It was things people were saying. And there was a period very early in 2022 when they actually tried to redefine terrorism as quote unquote ‘misinformation’. There’s a bulletin from February 2022 which I think DHS put out and then retracted under pressure. Once you start saying that people’s speech is terrorism you’re going down a bad path. And I don’t think that’s something that either party should do honestly."

Senator Schmitt has introduced two legislative measures related to these issues: The COLLUDE Act would remove Section 230 protections from social media companies if they censor speech at government direction; while another bill would allow citizens to hold individual bureaucrats accountable for collaborating with tech firms to suppress speech.

Missouri v Biden exposed communication between federal officials and technology platforms over pandemic-related content moderation policies.