asw, as a result, judge doty issued unhinge ad sanctioneral against all federal government employees from having contac tntact with social media companies and discouraging or removingwi free speech. that means the cdc, the fbi, the doeansj, the white house. the judge specifically. namechecked. white house spokeswoman. karine jean-pierre. hhs secretary xavier becerracrer and surgeon general vivek murthy. noy n generalw on your screen if prohibited activities for the feds, which include meeting, emailing, flagging, callin meetingg, collaborating, threatening, urging, following up or issuing bolo g,s. be on the lookout for censoredt content with social media. it is an absolutelye ce stunning rebuke of the censorship deep state and the biden administrationnsp and it s a win for free speech. r, the bidenou administration has appealed this judge s injunction. k now, judges don t usually talk like this. they don t issue such scathinghi opinions or broad injunctions. why here? well,
the past, to individuals of today, they re simply nothing an to hold anyone accountable fore . why do i pay to pay the price for the sins of the paste case f and you reap the benefits? in the case of the affirmative action, i m not saying you had affirmative actionrmativ , but you as a black man would reap the benefits of affirmative action forts oive acti the sinsp on someone of the past. we are only in the end, steven a individualass. undeell, first of all, i get where you re coming from and i can understand how you would look at it that waouldy. you have to respect the fact that i have a different cultural background, thate a diff thani nce you, and i might feel a bit differently about it. what i would tell you is this there s sothere ar many peoplerf and people that have been supportive of the supreme court s latest rulinmeg are ofm the mindset that blacks were getting an unfair advantage. what black people would contend to you is that it wasn t an to advantage.ntage. remember, rac