Civil Rights Lawsuit Filed Against Democrats Over Censoring Americans’ Election Tweets

The 2020 U.S. election was not only a pivotal moment in American history for the widespread adoption of unconstitutional election procedures in states across the country, but for the coordinated action between corporations and the state to “fortify” the election for the Democratic Party candidate Joe Biden.

In addition to private corporations like Facebook throwing hundreds of millions of dollars into “Zuckerberg boxes,” bags of difficult-to-trace absentee ballots were flooding into election headquarters across the country due to unprecedented changes to election laws allegedly justified by the pandemic.

When Americans began questioning what was going on in their democracy on social media, that’s when digital platforms began rolling out a bizarre and un-American censorship campaign to muzzle their dissent. It went merely beyond liberal activist CEOs attempting to rig the election in their preferred direction, however; there is strong evidence of government collusion with these social media platforms to ensure those questioning the election would be suppressed or silenced.

A lawsuit has now been filed to hold government officials accountable for conspiring with private companies to achieve what is effectively a violation of First Amendment rights. The Center for American Liberty has just sued California Secretary of State Alex Padilla, his agents, and Twitter for their plot to stifle dissent during the 2020 election. Dhillon Law and Liberty Center founder Harmeet Dhillon announced the critical legal case on Thursday:

“We at [Liberty Center] just filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against former CA Secretary of State turned US Sen. Alex Padilla, #Twitter, and more for the Govt’s role in Twitter banning attorney Rogan O’Handley,” Dhillon notes.

"*" indicates required fields

Would you rather........*
This poll subscribes you to our premium network of content. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

In the Center for Liberty’s press release it points to the discriminatory practices brought against conservative commentator and lawyer Rogan Handley.

Like many expressing concerns over the 2020 election, Rogan found himself the target of the California Office of Elections Cybersecurity. From November 2020 to February 2021, Rogan tweeted a series of messages—calling for an audit of every California ballot, a commission to study the 2020 election results, and raising concern over voter fraud—only to be swiftly “flagged” by leftist operatives working as an agent of the California Secretary of State who in turn instructed Twitter to remove Rogan’s tweets.

But that is not the worst of it…

In February 2021, Twitter permanently suspended Rogan altogether for tweeting, “Most votes in American history.” This tweet proved too much for the snowflakes at Twitter who in turn permanently suspended his account for supposedly violating “rules about election integrity.”

The actions of then California Secretary of State Alex Padilla, his agents, and Twitter are outrageous. Government cannot censor speech on the basis of viewpoint, but that is exactly what happened here.

Documents that are part of a new lawsuit show that the State of California had a “rapid response team” that flagged election tweets for removal by Twitter.

“California Democrats have access to a rapid response team at Twitter, which takes down tweets at the request of Democrats,” Mike Cernovich pointed out.

How can Democrats square their support for “democracy” with government and corporations rigging the election process to stifle the dissent of their opponents?

This case is vital for a robust defense of free speech rights in the Information Age on digital platforms that have become the equivalent of the public square. If the California government can get away with working with corporations to censor Rogan Handley, then next it can censor you.

As seen on Becker News. Follow Kyle Becker and Becker News on Twitter.

Notice: This article may contain commentary that reflects the author's opinion.