Plus you can’t an injunction against the courts interpreting a statute. It’s the courts interpreting and applying Section 230 and we already have cases rejecting arguments 230 is unconstitutional. It’s an idiotic argument like every other argument Fyk has made. And I have explained why b/4.
FFS, don’t you remember when I asked you what Constitutional provision it allegedly violates and you had no clue?
And why would the DOJ “side with Fyk?”
And again it doesn’t even get to that point because the case gets dismissed on a motion to dismiss based on res judicata and lack of standing.
FFS, Fyk has already been told that suing the federal gov't on this claim is uselss because there is no relief the gov't can give him on this.
Thus, even if the DOJ were to "side with Fyk," his lawsuit would still be useless. A judicial declaration that Section 230 unconstitutional by a district court is not binding on any parties other than the ones present in the case. And Facebook would not be in the case by the time such ...
declaration would be made. And the DoJ has no authority or role with regard to Section 230 and any action by the DoJ would have no legal impact on anyone else. As the Court noted the first time he sued the gov't. Which is why he is a moron.
Correction, it's one of plethora of reasons that he is a moron.