In this social media age‚ governments around the world — especially our own — are struggling with what to do with the onslaught of speech that counters the government agenda. There may be some people in government acting in good faith to really figure out how to deal with the truly evil stuff that finds its way online. When it comes to Biden administration officials‚ however‚ you know their true intentions by whom they consider real threats to “democracy” and the specific viewpoints they target. They’re casting a very wide net to try to deal with genuinely bad stuff‚ but they’re scooping up legitimate speech in the process — and it just happens to be legitimate speech that they disagree with. You can’t have freedom without the option to abuse it‚ or else it wouldn’t be true freedom. The U.S. Supreme Court this term will decide an important First Amendment case. The oral argument in Murthy v. Missouri was two weeks ago. The case involves the Biden administration pressuring social media companies to block views that the White House objects to on topics including COVID-19 origins‚ masks‚ vaccines‚ lockdowns‚ the Hunter Biden laptop‚ climate change‚ mail-in voting‚ and election integrity. The Biden administration sought to censor free speech even when the social media companies knew the suppressed misinformation was true. In addition to the White House‚ the FBI‚ the Centers for Disease Control‚ and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency all engaged in this pressure campaign against social media companies. According to an amicus brief filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression‚ “Various government officials became so entangled with social media platform moderation policies that they were able to effectively rewrite the platforms’ policies from the inside.” It seems clear that‚ as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit concluded last year‚ the Biden administration violated the First Amendment by meddling with what should be content moderation decisions made by private companies. Yet the Biden administration appealed this case all the way to the Supreme Court because officials argue that their free speech was being violated. The gall! During the oral argument‚ at least one Supreme Court justice‚ Ketanji Brown Jackson‚ seemed to agree with Team Biden. “My biggest concern is that your view of the First Amendment is hamstringing the government in significant ways‚” she said. She worried the government would be restricted in its response to a “threatening circumstance.” “Hamstringing” the government is kind of the whole point of the First Amendment if you think about it. The government cannot prohibit freedom of speech. Period. As interpreted by the Supreme Court over time‚ this applies across the board with very limited exceptions‚ such as defamation‚ genuine threats‚ or fraud. What’s more‚ the Constitution doesn’t include an emergency exemption clause. Unless the speech falls under one of the Supreme Court’s very limited exceptions‚ it must be allowed‚ even if the nation is in some kind of “threatening circumstance‚” as Jackson put it. Otherwise‚ what would stop a president from declaring something like a national climate emergency‚ then censoring speech that fails to prop up climate alarmism? The Constitution was designed by people who were absolutely set against unlimited government power. From the earliest Progressives to Justice Jackson‚ the left has always been convinced of the opposite: that good experts in government will be able to filter through speech and righteously determine the bad speech‚ that Americans need authorities to sift through the misinformation and disinformation to separate it from the “good speech” in which you’re allowed to engage.To have and maintain this vital First Amendment right‚ you must put up with a lot of truly evil garbage. People say and write and promote the worst stuff. They abuse this amazing freedom we have. That’s just the reality. Often‚ civil people easily agree on what speech is horrible‚ and then in the marketplace of ideas that horrible speech gets pushed to the fringes. But to keep this marketplace truly open‚ you deal with a constant barrage of stuff you disagree with. The solution to the garbage should never be worse than the garbage itself. The First Amendment isn’t conditioned upon “threatening circumstances‚” as Ketanji Brown Jackson put it. The First Amendment assumes such circumstances. You can’t have freedom without the option to abuse it‚ or else it wouldn’t be true freedom. Don’t let the Biden administration convince you of anything less during this critical Supreme Court case.Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights‚ top stories‚ show prep‚ and more delivered to your inbox.

Wisconsin has joined 27 other states in making it more difficult for ideologues with deep pockets — such as Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg — to financially meddle in elections. Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has vetoed multiple efforts to keep so-called "Zuckerbucks" out of elections in the Badger State. The state's Republican-controlled legislature figured lawmakers would give their constituents the final word on the matter‚ successfully voting to put corresponding constitutional amendments on the April primary ballot. The first question put to voters on the ballot Tuesday was whether Section 7(1) of Article III of the Wisconsin Constitution should be amended to prohibit all levels of government and all state employees from applying for‚ accepting‚ spending‚ or using money or equipment "in connection with the conduct of any primary‚ election‚ or referendum if the moneys or equipment are donated or granted by an individual or nongovernmental entity." This proposed amendment was backed by the Wisconsin Voter Alliance‚ Election Integrity for Wisconsin‚ the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty‚ and various other groups keen on restoring voter confidence and protecting American elections from private interference. Critics alleged that Zuckerberg's extensive funding of election administration during the pandemic was anything but benign — that the funds benefited then-candidate Joe Biden in 2020 to the tune of thousands of votes; that voter outreach funds have mostly gone to left-leaning cities of strategic importance; that "Zuckerberg illegal absentee ballot drop boxes scattered across Wisconsin" specifically served to help Democrats; and that the scheme amounted to a clever way of leftist billionaires getting around campaign finance laws. State Sen. Eric Wimberger (R)‚ a sponsor of the amendment‚ suggested days ahead of the vote that Republicans are "securing our elections by making sure local election officials‚ not out-of-state billionaires‚ are in charge of administering Wisconsin's elections." "In recent election cycles‚ out-of-state billionaires have given grants to local governments in Wisconsin that influence and even control how elections are run‚" said Wimberger. "But Wisconsin's elections shouldn't be run by unaccountable‚ out-of-state organizations using private money. They should be run by local non-partisan officials and paid for by the community." State Rep. Tyler August‚ another proponent of the amendment‚ posted an infographic to X last month stating‚ "In 2020 alone‚ Wisconsin received over $10 million in Zuckerbucks. 85% of that money was directed to the five widely Democrat cities: Madison‚ Milwaukee‚ Racine‚ Kenosha &; Green Bay." NBC News noted that this $10 million from Zuckerberg and his wife was mediated by a group called the Center for Tech and Civic Life‚ which was founded by Zuckerberg. Democrats and other leftists opposed the amendment. The ACLU of Wisconsin was among the outfits that sided with billionaires and dark money‚ stating‚ "Our democracy depends on local election officials having the staff and resources to do their jobs. The same politicians who put these questions on the ballot stripped millions in funding from the state budget to support election administration." The second question posed on Tuesday's ballot asked whether the state constitution should be amended to "provide that only election officials designated by law may perform tasks in the conduct of primaries‚ elections‚ and referendums." With over 95% of the votes in at the time of publication‚ the New York Times reported that 54.4% of voters answered "yes" to the first question and nearly 59% of voters answered "yes" to the second question. According to Ballotpedia‚ as of January‚ 27 states have enacted laws in or after 2021 banning or limiting the use of private money in the administration of elections; 21 of these states were Republican-controlled. Following the vote‚ Republican Party of Wisconsin Chairman Brian Schimming stated‚ "Victory! Wisconsin has spoken and the message is clear: elections belong to voters‚ not out-of-state billionaires. Thanks to the efforts by the Republican Party of Wisconsin and grassroots organizing‚ Wisconsinites have turned the page on Zuckerbucks and secured our elections from dark money donors." The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty‚ a conservative group that supported the amendments‚ also celebrated the Tuesday result. "The administration of our elections should be fair‚ impartial‚ and free from outside influence. With today's results‚ voters sent a clear message that they want to keep private money out of election administration‚" Rick Esenberg‚ WILL president and general counsel‚ said in a statement. "Today‚ Wisconsin becomes the 28th state to approve a measure to keep private funding out of impartial election administration. Whether you identify with the left or the right‚ ensuring the fairness and integrity of our elections should be a shared priority." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Zuckerberg donated $420 million to a nonprofit that dispersed the funds to state and local election officials in 2020.

The Hill's Newest Survey Drags the LGB into TQ Dissatisfaction With Healthcare and NO ONE is Buying It

Moore to the Point - The Gift of the 2024 Election

The new Apple Pencil 3 and the upcoming OLED iPad Pro might launch in early May. While these devices couldn't be announced soon enough‚ iPadOS 17.5 hints that Apple is making an even better Pencil for the new iPad. According to 9to5Mac's Filipe Espósito‚ the upcoming Apple Pencil 3 might feature a new squeeze gesture. The journalist writes that the feature "can be used for quick interactions such as adding shapes‚ signatures‚ stickers‚ or a text field." With that‚ it's possible that pressing the Apple Pencil surface might trigger these actions. Interestingly enough‚ Apple Pencil 2 supports a double-tap gesture to switch between tools‚ and you can flip the accessory to erase something written. If this iPadOS 17.5 spoiler becomes a reality‚ this might be the best Apple Pencil so far. With iPadOS 17.4 code‚ the journalist also found references to a future Apple Pencil supporting the Find My feature. Although it's unclear if it will work like an AirTag or a MagSafe Wallet‚ at least it will be easier for users to discover whether their accessory was detached or left behind from their iPad. Finally‚ another rumor says Apple could be working on interchangeable magnetic tips‚ which could make even more sense if this new squeeze feature is launched with the new Apple Pencil 3. Besides Apple Pencil 3‚ these are the latest OLED iPad Pro rumors Image source: Blackmagic Design After we expected Apple to release the OLED iPad Pro in early March or early April‚ Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says Cupertino is readying a May release for this tablet and the upcoming iPad Air 6. Two reasons Apple delayed the release were the low supply of 11-inch OLED panels and the company preparing a special version of iPadOS to launch alongside this new product. We expect a design change‚ camera improvements‚ new accessories‚ such as Apple Pencil 3 and a new Magic Keyboard‚ the M3 chip‚ and the OLED display instead of LCD and miniLED for the new iPad Pro. Below‚ you can discover everything we know about it. Don't Miss: iPad Pro 2024: Release date‚ OLED‚ price‚ features‚ &; everything we know The post Apple Pencil 3 will be the best OLED iPad Pro accessory if this leak is true appeared first on BGR. Today's Top Deals Best Apple Watch deals for April 2024 Today’s deals: $199 Meta Quest 2‚ $19 Apple AirTags‚ $699 M1 MacBook Air‚ $500 Moto Razr‚ more Today’s deals: $170 Roomba‚ LG OLED TVs‚ $498 Apple Watch Ultra‚ $14 Govee LED light strip‚ more Dreo ChefMaker was a game-changer in my kitchen – find out why I’m obsessed

Ukraine lowered the military conscription age Wednesday from 27 to 25 in an effort to replenish its depleted ranks after more than two years of war following Russia's full-scale invasion.

Law enforcement experts warn police departments looking to lower hiring standards to boost recruitment numbers to be "cautious" about what requirements they are sacrificing in their bid to increase the number of police officers on their force.

Criticism of House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson‚ R-La.‚ intensified after the recent passage of a $1.2 trillion spending package. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene‚ R-Ga.‚ filed a motion to vacate‚ causing some to bemoan the possibility of another leadership change.

Former President Donald Trump is holding a lead over President Joe Biden in six out of seven of the nation's most competitive battleground states‚ both on test ballots that include third-party and independent candidates and in a one-on-one matchup.