Dr. Shiva v Golaith: Our Government Is Using Big Tech To Launder Censorship
https://uncoverdc.com/2021/05/25/dr-shiva-v-golaith-our-government-is-using-big-tech-to-launder-censorship/
In Oct. 2020, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai posted four screenshots on Twitter from a collection of emails that allegedly showed Secretary of State William Francis Galvin and Elections Director Michelle Tassinari admitting that the state had deleted ballot images, violating federal law. According to the law in Massachusetts, those images should have been preserved for 22 months. As a result of Shiva’s post, he was suspended from Twitter and then ultimately banned permanently in February. On Nov. 20, Shiva filed a lawsuit and an emergency preliminary injunction against Secretary of State William Francis Galvin for deleting the ballot images.
This historic lawsuit has become a much bigger matter than deleted ballot images. Shiva had run in the primary with strong grassroots backing to the tune of $2 million for a U.S. Senate seat in September and lost. He maintains to this day that he should have won in a landslide. He has also filed a One Person, One Vote lawsuit, allegedly exposing computer algorithms used to steal the election from him.
Shiva won in the predominately hand-counted county, Franklin County; however, in every other county, he lost. During that time, he had been “hitting hard” on Twitter about election fraud, which he maintains he can prove, and none of his tweets were taken down. However, the minute he posted his first round of tweets about the deleted ballot images in October, he was suspended.
His second lawsuit is now a historic First Amendment case because, according to Shiva, the most important speech we have, political speech, has been—and is being—violated by the government of the United States through their social media proxies. He alleges that it wasn’t Twitter, a private entity, who took him down but, rather, it was the government who ordered Twitter to take Shiva off their platform.
Shiva declares, “We’ve been taught by media and, in fact, even politicians, that it is Big Tech or Twitter which independently throws people off their platforms. That’s been the narrative…and Twitter’s position is that they are a private actor and, as a private actor, they also have first amendment rights, so they have every right to throw people off because they are protected by Section 230.”
Shiva believes that his lawsuit will become the “lawsuit of the century” because he can prove that the government has violated his constitutional rights by colluding with Twitter to suppress his political speech—based on factual evidence of the deleted ballot images, not opinion, that Shiva posted on the platform. “Political speech,” Shiva says, “Is the most protected speech in the United States Constitution. I wasn’t just some random person,” he continued, “I was running for federal U.S. Senate seat at the time.”
No lawyer in the state of Massachusetts wanted to take his first amendment case on, so he filed the $1.2 billion case on his own in federal court with Judge Wolf presiding. Judge Wolf was the judge who “ordered the FBI to publicly disclose the bureau’s relationship with Bulger and Flemmi and to turn over its informant file.”
Shiva also filed an emergency preliminary injunction to request from the court a return to Twitter immediately. Shiva had used Twitter, a “primarily political” social media platform, to build his following organically to over 350,000 followers. He was effectively shut down, to his great detriment, during a period of time when he needed the platform most to communicate and raise money. The removal of Twitter from his use also shut off a primary platform from which Shiva could communicate his claims of election fraud to his fellow citizens.
Shiva Freedom of Speech Lawsuit
Judge Wolf wanted him to argue the Blum v Yaretzky test to prove that “state action took place.” In other words, did the government, not Twitter, take action against Shiva using Twitter as cover. During the hearing, the court was able to “elicit from the Communications Director from the government…that the government has a Trusted Twitter Partnership…it is like they have an AMEX Black Card, preferential treatment…and they have a portal that has been established for the government to report on people like me—people who supposedly spread ‘misinformation’.”