The U.S. District Judge who granted a preliminary injunction that barred several federal agencies from communicating with social media companies in various ways, denied the Justice Department’s motion to suspend this injunction.

The temporary injunction remains in effect following the ruling on Monday. Later Monday, the administration asked the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for a temporary block of the lower court order.

“Today’s victory is another important step in the fight against government censorship and big tech,” said Missouri Republican Senator Eric Schmitt.

He added that “while this is a great win, the case will continue in higher courts and our efforts to end this “censorship enterprise” once and for all also continue — stay tuned.”

In 2022, Mr. Schmitt filed Missouri V. Biden when he was the attorney general of his state. He alleged a “vast enterprise of censorship” between federal government and social media firms.

The lawsuit claimed that the federal government had overstepped its bounds in trying to convince social media firms to remove postings which could lead to vaccine hesitancy or have an impact on elections during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

On July 4, Judge Terry Doughty of U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana issued a temporary injunction that barred federal agencies from communicating with large tech companies in various ways.

The order prohibits agencies and officials “in any way” from putting pressure on social media companies to suppress content.

Judge Doughty – an appointee by former President Donald Trump – cited “substantial proof” of a wide-ranging censorship campaign.

He wrote that “the evidence produced so far depicts a dystopian scene.” The United States Government appears to have played a similar role to Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth” during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

In a motion submitted Thursday to a federal court of appeals, attorneys for the Biden administration said that Judge Doughty’s ruling could “cause grave harm” because it would prevent the government from engaging in “a vast range lawful and responsibly conducted conduct”.

In a court filing by the Biden Administration, attorneys led principal Deputy Assistant Attorney-General Brian M. Boynton referred to the order as “ambiguous.”

The administration said that it would prevent them from “speaking out on issues of public concern or working with social media companies to prevent grave harm to our democratic process and the American people.”

The administration stated that “these immediate and continuing harms to Government outweigh the risk of injury to Plaintiffs” if a stay was granted.

The Washington Times reported exclusively that FBI whistleblowers told the House Judiciary Committee the bureau leadership ignored the judge’s order and had not issued any directives or guidance to its rank-and file employees regarding steps to comply with the court’s injunction.