Epoch Times - Attorney Mark Chenoweth recently won a landmark settlement in a free speech court case.

April 2, 2026 - Epoch Times

00:58

Attorney Mark Chenoweth recently won a landmark settlement in a free speech court case.

“The First Amendment protects false speech, or what the government thinks is false speech.”Show more Attorney Mark Chenoweth recently won a landmark settlement in a free speech court case. He breaks down the precedent it sets for protecting speech the government labels as “misinformation.” “Just because the government labels something as disinformation, misinformation, or malinformation, that doesn’t mean the government can take it down or censor it.” “That's still protected under the First Amendment.” “The First Amendment wants us to be able to engage in that robust debate.” Mark Chenoweth just secured a significant victory against government censorship during the COVID pandemic. He breaks down the precedent this sets and how the battle for free speech is far from over. Check below for this full interview: https://ept.ms/416MBLH Show less
[Read More]

Time	Text
	What does it mean for you and me?
	Sure.
	Well, I think the main thing it means is that it's going to be harder for the government to do this kind of thing again.
	We have a court order that says a few different things.
	It says that this kind of social media, sort of new media, if you will, is still protected by the First Amendment.
	It also says that just because the government labels something as disinformation, misinformation, or malinformation, that doesn't mean the government can take it down or censor it.
	That's still protected under the First Amendment.
	The First Amendment protects.
	False speech or what the government thinks is false speech.
	So there's a role for the government to police speech, but the government needs to police the line between legal speech and illegal speech.
	So, child porn, something like that, yes, the government could go after that.
	But the government can't police this line between what it thinks is true and what it thinks is false because that chills robust debate.
	And the First Amendment wants us to be able to engage in that robust debate.

Time

Text

What does it mean for you and me?

Sure.

Well, I think the main thing it means is that it's going to be harder for the government to do this kind of thing again.

We have a court order that says a few different things.

It says that this kind of social media, sort of new media, if you will, is still protected by the First Amendment.

It also says that just because the government labels something as disinformation, misinformation, or malinformation, that doesn't mean the government can take it down or censor it.

That's still protected under the First Amendment.

The First Amendment protects.

False speech or what the government thinks is false speech.

So there's a role for the government to police speech, but the government needs to police the line between legal speech and illegal speech.

So, child porn, something like that, yes, the government could go after that.

But the government can't police this line between what it thinks is true and what it thinks is false because that chills robust debate.

And the First Amendment wants us to be able to engage in that robust debate.