Supreme Court Declines Censorship Suit

Rogan O’Handley’s censorship case has been tossed by the court.

O’Handley, an online commentator, was fighting the suspension of his X account over claims he made regarding the 2020 election.

After claiming that the election was rigged, his account was flagged and suspended.

Not Happening

After O’Handley made his posts on X, California election officials had the posts flagged for review as election misinformation.

O’Handley sued, claiming that the state of California pressured X to censor his posts.

The court, if you recall, recently dismissed an online censorship case, Murthy v. Missouri, citing lack of standing by the plaintiffs.

I would wager that most people reading this report know him more for his online handle, which is DC_Draino.

The court denied the review of the case with an unsigned order, showing no dissenting opinions.

The complaint by O’Handley centered around the creation of the Office of Election Cybersecurity (OEC) in 2018.

This office, in turn, monitored posts and recommended to X which posts it believed violated the TOS in regard to misinformation.

His complaint added that the California Secretary of State’s office issued a report claiming that “misinformation identified by our office or voters was promptly reviewed and, in most cases, removed by the social media platforms.”

Prior to the OEC being formed, O’Handley had made posts that never raised flags, and that he only had problems with those posts after the OEC started to monitor accounts.

The posts in question were then labeled as “disputed,” his distribution was cut, and eventually his account was suspended, taking him roughly two years to be reinstated.

A lower court ruling determined, “OEC’s mandate gives it no enforcement power over Twitter.”

With the Supreme Court’s denial, this ruling will now stand.

As of this report, O’Handley’s office had not commented on this ruling.