Texas just sent a blunt message to Silicon Valley: You don’t get to censor Texans and then run home to California.In a world where Big Tech routinely decides who may speak and who must be silenced, Defense Distributed v. YouTube, Google, and Alphabet has become a defining moment in the national fight over digital free expression. The shock isn’t the censorship at issue; it’s the fact that Big Tech — for once — lost.In a time when Americans are desperate for leaders willing to stand up to media and tech conglomerates, Texas showed what real resolve looks like.Defense Distributed, a Texas company, committed the unpardonable offense of promoting the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.Our videos and ads — some of them simply announcing court victories — were throttled, suppressed, or removed by YouTube and Google. None of this surprised us. These platforms built vast empires on controlling information and burying viewpoints that fall outside their ideology.Texas prepared for this fightThe surprise is that Texas saw this coming and armed itself for the conflict. HB 20 — now Chapter 143A of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code — directly prohibits viewpoint-based censorship by major platforms. The law doesn’t hint, suggest, or politely advise. It states outright: Social media companies may not censor Texans for their viewpoints, and lawsuits brought under this chapter stay in Texas courts no matter what boilerplate corporate contracts say.So when Defense Distributed filed suit, YouTube and Google reached for their favorite escape route: forum-selection clauses that force nearly every challenger into California courts, where Big Tech enjoys home-field advantage. It’s a delay tactic, a cost-inflation tactic, a shield against accountability — and it almost always works.But Texas slammed that door shut before they reached it.No escapeHB 20 doesn’t merely frown on these clauses; it voids them. The statute declares that any attempt to waive its protections violates Texas public policy — public policy the law describes as “of the highest importance.” The legislature anticipated Big Tech’s usual playbook and locked the gates years in advance.The federal court recognized this. Judge Alan Albright ruled that transferring the case to California would directly undermine Texas’ strong public policy. Under federal law, courts cannot enforce a forum-selection clause that contradicts a state’s deeply rooted interests — especially when the legislature spells those interests out with the clarity found in HB 20.Silicon Valley does not hear the word “no” very often. Big Tech’s money, influence, and political allies usually clear the path. But in a federal courtroom in the Lone Star State, Texas’ commitment to protecting its citizens from ideological censorship outweighed Silicon Valley’s customary dominance. The court refused to let YouTube and Google drag the case back to California.The fight stayed in Texas — exactly where the legislature intended.A national shift and a model for statesThe timing matters. Americans now understand that Big Tech can shape elections, suppress dissent, and curate truth itself. HB 20 was mocked by the press, attacked by activists, and targeted by corporate lobbyists from the moment it passed. Yet today, it stands as one of the most potent legal tools in the country’s fight against digital censorship.HB 20 is no longer just a statute; it is proof that a state with conviction can push back and win.RELATED: Big Tech CEOs should leave policy to the politicians Photo by Win McNamee/Getty ImagesThis victory is more than a procedural ruling. It affirms that Big Tech’s era of unchallenged authority is not inevitable. Defense Distributed didn’t merely keep our lawsuit in Texas; we preserved the principle that powerful corporations cannot hide their censorship behind “terms of service” fine print.Texas drew a line in the sand, and — for once — Silicon Valley stopped.In a time when Americans are desperate for leaders willing to stand up to media and tech conglomerates, Texas showed what real resolve looks like. This ruling promises that citizens still have a fighting chance, that speech still matters, and that even the world’s largest corporations remain subject to the laws of a state determined to defend its people.

A new 5-CD boxed set sorts out some of the New Zealand band's earliest material. The post Before There Was Crowded House, There Was Split Enz: Box Set Review appeared first on Best Classic Bands.

Morning Minute: What Will the Day Bring?

From Trump to Vance: Musk Maps Out Epic New 12-Year Efficiency Era

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the Trump administration is prioritizing the Western Hemisphere by pressuring Venezuela's narco-state and tightening scrutiny of Afghan arrivals after what he called Biden-era vetting failures.

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., issued a forceful rebuke of Democrats – and now even what he called complicit Republicans – for attempting to smear War Secretary Pete Hegseth over his execution of lawful lethal airstrikes on narco-terrorist drug boats in the Caribbean."

President Donald Trump, while railing about Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and reports of COVID-era fraud involving members of the state's Somali immigrant population, called Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Somali immigrant, "garbage" and said he does not want Somalis in the U.S.

U.S. private payrolls unexpectedly declined in November, the ADP employment report showed Wednesday.Private employment decreased by 32,000 jobs last month after an upwardly revised 47,000 increase in October.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, is raising the prospect of impeachment proceedings against U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani after she blocked implementation of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act's provision to strip federal Medicaid funding from Planned Parenthood in 22 states.

The Pentagon is set to release a redacted, unclassified version of its internal review of senior officials' use of private messaging apps to discuss military operations, according to a report. The document is expected to be made public Thursday and has already been...