ATL Editors:
Federal Judge Brantley Starr (N.D. Tex.) is playing
procedural whack-a-mole to avoid ruling on First Amendment claims against Elon
Musk's X Corp. The same judge who famously ordered Southwest Airlines lawyers
to attend "religious liberty training" from Alliance Defending
Freedom--treating biblical accounts as historical fact in that opinion--is now
systematically blocking a free speech case through manufactured procedural
obstacles.
The Pattern:
In Richards v. X Corp., Case No. 3:25-cv-916, Judge
Starr has:
- Offered
false procedural choices (told plaintiff to file motion to proceed without
local counsel OR get local counsel, then denied the motion and pretended
he never made the offer)
- "Misread"
clear venue language to force improper transfer
- Refused
to rule on emergency TRO for 2+ weeks while 64,000+ posts were deleted;
then dismissed "without prejudice" - never addressing the First
Amendment claims
- Required
TWO mandamus petitions to the Fifth Circuit in just 32 days
- Created
contradictory local counsel requirements that change daily
The Stakes:
This case directly challenges Musk's government
entanglements--his DOGE role, $300 million to Trump's campaign, $15.4 billion
in government contracts, Musk’s stated plans to work for Trump 1-2 days per
week while running X Corp after DOGE role ends, and Musk’s stated back-channel
to US Intgelligence including Defense Secretary Hegseth. Yet Judge Starr
refuses to even consider whether X Corp. has become a state actor subject to
First Amendment constraints, and even mischaracterized Plaintiff’s argument.
The Hypocrisy:
In Carter v. Southwest Airlines (3:17-CV-2278-X), (page
2 here - Memorandum
Opinion and Order – #467 in Carter v. Transport Workers Union of America Local
556 (N.D. Tex., 3:17-cv-02278) – CourtListener.com) Starr wrote: "It's
hard to see how Southwest could have violated the notice requirement more. Take
these modified historical and movie anecdotes. After God told Adam,
'[Y]ou must not eat from the tree]'..." He then ordered mandatory
religious training from ADF, positioning himself as a champion of religious
expression.
But when @tlthe5th (Thomas Richards)--a bible scholar and
historical researcher who has spent 25 years documenting corruption through
extensive research, with a particular focus on exposing the Vatican's child
rape epidemic and institutional cover-ups--brings First Amendment claims after
X Corp deleted 64,000+ posts exposing uncomfortable truths about power (Trump,
Musk, etc.), suddenly Judge Starr can't find his copy of the Constitution.
Apparently some religious viewpoints deserve protection while others deserve
procedural burial.
One might ask why a "religious liberty" judge is
so eager to silence criticism of the Catholic Church's documented crimes
against children.
Why This Matters:
- Shows
how Trump judges use procedure to protect tech oligarchs with government
ties
- Exposes
selective application of "religious freedom" based on political
alignment
- Documents
retaliation to plaintiff after public criticism
- Reveals
potential coordination between Trump judiciary and Musk's empire
All filings available at: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69885455/richards-v-x-corp/
This is the judicial equivalent of "rules for thee but
not for me"--championing free speech for corporate lawyers while suffocating
it for individual Americans who challenge the Trump-Musk alliance and expose
institutional corruption.
Want the full documentation? Happy to provide docket entries
showing the whack-a-mole pattern. The plaintiff (@tlthe5th / OvertPsyops.ai )
has documented extensive evidence of the censorship.
Lisa Weingarten Richards
LWR@LWRlawoffices.com
No comments:
Post a Comment