Joe Biden told Facebook what to censor – and Facebook did it.
Now the federal government has signed a court order admitting it happened.
The consent decree landed, and what's inside it should make every American furious.
Biden Big Tech Censorship and the Hunter Biden Laptop
The Biden White House spent years pressuring Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter to scrub content the administration labeled "misinformation."
That meant COVID-19 vaccine skepticism, questions about lockdowns, and the Hunter Biden laptop story – the one the FBI had authenticated since December 2019 and still let social media bury as "Russian disinformation" ten days before the 2020 election.
The New York Post broke the laptop story on October 14, 2020. Twitter locked the Post's account within hours. Facebook throttled distribution before fact-checkers had reviewed a single claim.
Trump pollster John McLaughlin later found 4.6% of Biden voters would have switched their votes had they known about the laptop – easily enough to flip Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Arizona.
The federal government then spent the next four years fighting in court to make sure no one could stop them from doing it again.
Missouri v Biden: How the Lawsuit Survived the Supreme Court
Then Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt filed suit in May 2022, joined by Louisiana.
What discovery revealed was staggering. By the end of 2021, the Biden White House had pressured Facebook, Google, and Amazon to change their content moderation policies. Facebook staffers, internal documents showed, were suppressing material they privately acknowledged was "often true content" because it contradicted White House vaccine messaging.
On July 4, 2023 – in an opinion that compared the Biden operation to an Orwellian "Ministry of Truth" – federal judge Terry Doughty issued a sweeping injunction ordering the censorship to stop.
Biden's Justice Department appealed immediately.
The Supreme Court sided with the administration in June 2024 – not on the merits, but on standing. Six justices ruled the plaintiffs couldn't prove direct, traceable harm. The censorship enterprise itself was never legally cleared.
Attorneys at the New Civil Liberties Alliance went back to the district court. Discovery continued. And Trump, on his first day in office, signed Executive Order 14149 formally condemning the entire scheme.
The Missouri v Biden Consent Decree and What It Locks In
The consent decree signed Tuesday is legally extraordinary. The federal government – the CDC, the Surgeon General, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency – has now agreed in writing, under penalty of court enforcement, that it cannot threaten social media platforms into suppressing protected speech.
Not for ten months. For ten years.
Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, who helped litigate the case from the start, made clear what distinguishes this from a presidential order. "It creates a binding agreement between the parties that can be judicially enforced," she said.
Any future administration that tries to resurrect the censorship machine won't just be reversing a policy – it will be triggering a new round of litigation against a standing federal court order.
Senator Eric Schmitt, who launched the original lawsuit as Missouri's attorney general, said the decree delivers on everything the case was built to achieve.
"This decision locks in Americans' First Amendment rights, and guarantees that even in the digital age, the federal government cannot deplatform protected speech they simply disagree with," he said. "Missouri struck first, and we won big."
The Admission Buried in the Fine Print
The most significant line in the consent decree isn't about COVID or elections. It's this: the Trump administration agreed that government officials calling speech "misinformation" or "disinformation" does not strip it of constitutional protection.
That kills the loophole Biden used for four years. The administration's strategy was simple – label conservative content as harmful, hand the list to Big Tech, and let the platforms do the silencing.
Section 230 immunity gave the platforms cover. The implicit threat of losing that immunity gave the government its leverage.
The consent decree closes the door on that playbook. Permanently. Under court supervision. With individual plaintiffs – Jill Hines and Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, whose content was directly suppressed – granted standing to enforce it themselves.
Biden's Justice Department filed every appeal available, ran out the clock, and still lost. The consent decree is the court's verdict on Joe Biden: he built a censorship machine, pointed it at his political enemies, and used it to win an election – and now a federal judge has his name on a ten-year order proving it.
Sources:
- Tyler O'Neil, "Consent Decree Marks Final Defeat of 'Orwellian' Biden 'Censorship Regime,'" The Daily Signal, March 24, 2026.
- Senator Eric Schmitt, "Schmitt Celebrates Historic First Amendment Victory in Landmark Missouri V. Biden Case," Press Release, March 24, 2026.
- New Civil Liberties Alliance, "NCLA Reaches Historic Settlement, Strikes Major Blow Against Government's Social Media Censorship," March 24, 2026.
- House Judiciary Committee Republicans, "Weaponization Committee Exposes the Biden White House Censorship Regime in New Report," September 27, 2024.
- House Judiciary Committee Republicans, "FBI Election Interference Report," October 30, 2024.
- Washington Times, "Media's Suppression of Hunter Biden's Laptop Was Election Interference," March 24, 2022.
