Judge rules US violated Palestinian American’s rights in phone search
The Cradle | July 17, 2026
A federal judge has ruled that the US government violated the constitutional rights of Palestinian American Osama Abu Irshaid after customs officials seized and searched his cellphone during two separate encounters at a US international airport in 2024.
In a ruling filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, US District Judge Michael Nachmanoff determined that the phone searches violated Irshaid’s Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable government searches and seizures.
CAIR welcomes the court’s decision
Irshaid serves as the executive director of American Muslims for Palestine and is a US citizen of Palestinian descent.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which filed the lawsuit on Irshaid’s behalf two years ago, welcomed the court’s decision on Thursday.
The Muslim civil rights organization said in its lawsuit that the federal government had placed Irshaid on a watch list that was discriminatory and racist.
CBP agents conducted advanced phone searches
According to CAIR, US Customs and Border Protection agents twice seized Irshaid’s cellphone and carried out “advanced” searches when he returned to the United States from international travel in 2024.
At the time, the government denied adding individuals to any such watch list based on race, religion, or protected speech activities.
Rights groups have raised growing concerns in recent years over increased scrutiny of Americans with Middle Eastern, Arab, and Palestinian backgrounds, particularly over their political views, following Israeli genocide in Gaza, which started in October 2023.
US blocks SSL security certificates for Iran’s Fars News Agency
The Cradle | July 17, 2026
Washington has blocked the issuance of SSL security certificates for Fars News Agency‘s website, cutting the country’s most visited news outlet off from browser-trusted encryption, the agency revealed on 17 July.
Without valid certificates, visitors to the site face security warnings and restricted access, while the agency’s content has been removed from Google search results.
Technical assessments confirm that all major internationally recognized Certificate Authorities – including Let’s Encrypt, DigiCert, and Sectigo – have rejected certificate requests for the agency’s domains, citing US sanctions pressure.
The measure is the latest in a series of US actions against the outlet. The US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control seized the agency’s .com domain in 2020, and in September 2023 added Fars and its CEO to the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) sanctions list.
The EU and Canada have since imposed sanctions of their own.
Fars has faced repeated efforts to restrict its reach, including the removal of its Instagram account, which had nearly three million followers.
Iran’s Computer Emergency Response and Coordination Center (MAHER) says the agency has been the primary target of sustained cyberattacks aimed at disrupting the country’s domestic media infrastructure.
The block forms part of a broader western campaign to dominate the media narrative against its geopolitical adversaries by suppressing opposing voices while artificially amplifying its own.
Western governments are simultaneously dismantling online anonymity at home through identity verification laws that, under the pretext of child protection, tie every post to a legal identity – backed by biometric verification requirements, VPN restrictions, and the scanning of private messages.
The measures tighten control over expression both abroad and within their own borders, amid ongoing crackdowns on pro-Palestine and pro-Iran speech.
An investigation by TIME revealed that Israel has been paying $1.5 million per month to Clock Tower X, a firm owned by US President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Brad Parscale, to run a covert influence campaign targeting young US conservatives through paid influencer networks, coordinated messaging in private group chats, and websites designed to shape how AI chatbots characterize Israel.
US officials now believe the operation turned against Trump himself, as paid influencers attacked the now broken ceasefire with Iran.
In May, Israel allocated roughly $730 million to its 2026 Hasbara propaganda budget, more than four times the previous year’s allocation, even as polling shows 60 percent of US respondents now view Israel unfavorably, with experts dismissing the spending as unable to offset the impact of its genocide in Gaza.
The Cradle analyst Mohamad Hasan Sweidan previously detailed how Israel operates a “Digital Iron Dome,” a system combining mass reporting campaigns to take down content exposing its crimes in Gaza, algorithmic ad warfare that floods timelines with state propaganda, and hundreds of millions of dollars in influencer contracts and AI-targeted campaigns to manipulate global perceptions.
Armenian PM persecutes dissent as West turns blind eye – rights group
RT | July 15, 2026
Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has created “an atmosphere of fear” through the “systematic” persecution of political opponents with the tacit backing of Western nations, a newly formed rights group has claimed, warning that any dissenting voice is now treated as an “enemy.”
Tensions have remained high since last month’s parliamentary election, in which Pashinyan’s pro-EU Civil Contract party won 49.74% of the vote, according to the Central Electoral Commission (CEC). At least seven opposition parties have petitioned the constitutional court to annul the results, alleging widespread electoral misconduct, while hundreds of protesters rallied outside the CEC headquarters.
On Monday, the Committee for the Protection of the Rights of Persons Subjected to Political Persecution – a watchdog established by lawyers, political activists, and several former officials – accused the government of waging a campaign to silence the opposition.
“Everything is being done to foster a climate of fear, isolate political and public figures, and attempt to decapitate the numerous opposition forces,” former MP and lawyer Elinar Vardanyan said. According to the committee, around half a dozen opposition politicians are either in custody or facing criminal prosecution.
“Anyone who holds a different point of view is regarded by the authorities not as an opponent, but as an enemy,” said Armenia’s first ombudswoman, Larisa Alaverdyan, who joined the group. Committee members argued that Pashinyan has been able to pursue the crackdown because he has effectively received a “carte blanche” from his Western backers.
“In pursuit of their own interests, Western institutions are not merely turning a blind eye to Pashinyan’s actions – they are, in effect, encouraging them,” political analyst Yervand Bozoyan said, accusing foreign governments and international organizations of being “silently complicit in the destruction of democracy” in Armenia.
Pashinyan has declared the opposition parties that entered parliament illegitimate and vowed to strip them of their political standing. He has also said his government intends to confiscate the assets of the leaders of the three largest opposition parties, adding that they “should be left hungry.”
Following those remarks, prosecutors opened a criminal case against former President Robert Kocharyan, leader of the Armenia Alliance, the third-largest parliamentary party. Another opposition leader, Samvel Karapetyan, has remained in custody since last year on charges of plotting a coup, which he denies.
About a month before the election, Pashinyan hosted an EU-Armenia summit and a meeting of the European Political Community (EPC), an EU-led forum launched in 2022 after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. He has also pledged to deepen Armenia’s integration with the EU, despite the country’s continued reliance on trade with Russia and Moscow’s warnings that adopting EU standards could damage the South Caucasus nation’s economy.
French Donbass Charity Founder’s Show Trial Designed to ‘Neutralize’ Dissent to Hostility to Russia

Sputnik – 15.07.2026
The criminal case against SOS Donbass organizer Anna Novikova is part of France and EU’s broader policy of “intimidating dissenters and neutralizing them to suppress domestic opposition to the official hostility to Russia,” independent French geopolitical analyst Come Carpentier de Gourdon told Sputnik.
“In fact any support of Russia, even by quoting or circulating news reports, opinions or comments from Russian (state) media is considered in France as connivence with the enemy and therefore potentially treasonous,” with Russia deemed “de facto an enemy country,” the observer pointed out.
But the prosecution may face problems, because the law “is far from clear” regarding humanitarian aid, “and any trial can become very controversial as the accused may object the French Government’s position: Ukraine is not an ally of France or a NATO member, France has not declared war on Russia.”
“Therefore objections can be raised to the claim that assistance to the Donbass and denunciation of Ukrainian actions there is tantamount to supporting Russia’s military campaign.”
Nevertheless, “other EU countries” should be “expected to adopt similar measures or laws,” the analyst fears.
Case Flunks Even EU’s Own Fake Rule of Law Standards
Novikova’s case does not even “adhere to the three Orwellian slogans of the EU – democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights,” political analyst Dr. Greg Simons told Sputnik.
The “purely political” crackdown “is a continuation of the larger attempt to shut out any alternative views,” and was preceded by things like bans on Russian foreign-facing media, sanctions and economic warfare against critics. It will inevitably expand over time, Simons expects.
“The Ukraine issue is going to become much more sensitive and toxic politically to Europe for supporting this cause,” and Novikova’s “lawfare” imprisonment and trial are a “test case” for tightening control over the narrative on Ukraine.
It’s also an “an act of pure intimidation so that people will stop breaking the narrative” amid the growing desperation and political vulnerability of the French government, Simons suggests, pointing to President Macron’s growing vulnerability and questions on his political future, and similar trends regarding the anti-Russia ideology of Euro-Atlanticism in general.
UK moves to ban Iran’s IRGC, cites unfounded national security threats
Al Mayadeen | July 13, 2026
The British government announced Monday that it will designate Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps under new national security powers, deepening already strained relations between London and Tehran, The Guardian reported.
Rather than formally proscribing the IRGC under the “Terrorism Act”, the government will classify the Iranian military body as an organization involved in “foreign power threat activity.” The new mechanism carries consequences comparable to “terrorist proscription” and would criminalize certain forms of support or assistance once approved by Parliament.
The designation marks a significant shift in Britain’s position after previous Conservative governments declined calls to formally ban the IRGC, partly because it is an official component of the Iranian state and armed forces.
Home Office cites alleged threats
Announcing the measure, the Home Office said the decision followed a review of alleged activities connected to the organizations targeted by the new designations.
“Having carefully considered all the evidence, the home secretary has concluded that there is sufficient basis to reasonably believe that each of these bodies is engaged in foreign power threat activity, and that each designation is necessary to protect the safety and interests of the United Kingdom.”
British authorities linked the decision to alleged plots and cyberoperations attributed to Iran.
London has also claimed more than 20 allegedly Iran-linked plots identified by British security agencies over the previous year.
The British government has not publicly presented evidence establishing direct IRGC involvement in every incident cited in support of the measure.
Iranian and Russian bodies targeted
Alongside the IRGC, the government said it would designate the Islamic Movement of the Companions of the Right, or IMCR, which British authorities blame for several attacks against Jewish institutions and other targets in the country.
The incidents attributed to the group reportedly include arson and vandalism attacks targeting synagogues, emergency vehicles operated by the Jewish volunteer service Hatzola and the offices of an Iranian opposition media organisation.
Russia’s GRU Volunteer Corps, which Britain describes as an overseas operational body connected to Russian military intelligence, will also be listed under the same legal framework.
The measures are expected to make it easier for British authorities to prosecute individuals accused of acting for, assisting, or receiving benefits from designated foreign-linked bodies. The designations must first receive parliamentary approval before entering into force.
Diplomatic fallout expected
The decision is likely to further damage relations between Britain and Iran at a time of heightened regional tensions and ongoing conflict involving Tehran and Washington.
British officials had previously warned that action against the IRGC could prompt retaliatory diplomatic measures, including the possible removal of the UK ambassador from Tehran.
The IRGC was established following Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution and operates as an official branch of the country’s armed forces. It plays a central role in Iran’s defense structure and reports to the country’s supreme leadership.
Britain’s decision follows a similar move by the European Union, which formally added the IRGC to its list of “terrorist organisations” in February 2026.
US demands Spain extradite pro-Palestine activist on ‘dubious’ money laundering charges
By Kit Klarenberg | The Grayzone | July 13, 2026
Fergie Chambers, a communist philanthropist and heir to the Cox family fortune, has been jailed in Ibiza, Spain, on the orders of the US Department of Justice. According to a sealed indictment seen by The Grayzone, Chambers now awaits extradition to Washington on dubious federal charges of “international money laundering… with the intent to provide material support to and resources to foreign terrorist organizations.” If deported to the US, he faces up to 30 years in prison.
On July 10, six Spanish police vehicles surrounded Chambers’ car while he drove through Ibiza with his family, before detaining him. Since his arrest, he has been denied bail and contact with the outside world. Chambers’ detention marks the first time an individual has faced extradition to the US from Spain for supporting the Palestinian cause.
An heir to the vast Cox family fortune, in 2023 he cut ties with his family and sold his stake in Cox Enterprises, receiving an estimated $250 million. Vowing to use this money to fund social activism and international solidarity work, Chambers has since donated over $1 million to humanitarian projects supporting those impacted by the Gaza genocide, and to support pro-Palestine activist groups and news outlets.
The sealed indictment offers no evidence that Chambers has donated any money to “foreign terrorist organizations.” It merely states “Chambers made numerous transfers of funds from banks in the US to banks in Tunisia,” where he relocated in late 2023.
It appears Chambers used those funds for seemingly legal purposes, including investing in local businesses and sponsoring the Club Africain football team, which in May became champion of the Tunisian Ligue Professionnelle. Chambers has bankrolled similar enterprises, along with political and social causes since the early 2000s, including paying the bail and legal fees of imprisoned left-wing activists.
“The Department of Justice is politically persecuting Fergie [Chambers] because he is using his wealth to support Palestine, and help people facing genocide in Gaza. His crime is dedicating his life to building a better society, rather than exploiting people, extract wealth and profit from war,” Stella Schnabel, Chambers’ partner, told The Grayzone. “He should be home safe with our family and continuing his important humanitarian and social advocacy, not incarcerated in a foreign jail facing effective life imprisonment back in the US.”
Chambers’ arrest comes amidst bitter tensions between the Trump administration and Spanish government, with Washington lashing out over President Pedro Sánchez’s criticism of Israel’s assaults on Gaza and Iran, and his refusal to allow Washington to use his country to stage attacks on Iran.
Chambers’ arrest occurred the same day the Washington Post reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio invited senior ministers from more than 60 countries to a meeting on tackling the alleged scourge of “transnational far-left terrorism.” Critics, including some US officials themselves, charge that the Trump administration is seeking to abuse powerful counterterrorism tools to crack down on left-wing activists.
In May, Trump’s new counterterrorism czar Sebastian Gorka – a pro-Israel fanatic exposed by The Grayzone in November 2024 as a longstanding British intelligence asset – unveiled a new “counterterrorism plan” which explicitly targets supposed “left-wing extremist groups” at home and abroad. A US counterterror official recently told the Washington Post that targeting left-wing activists with accusations of links to foreign terrorist groups “can unlock certain investigative tools,” including intensive surveillance. The false conflation of Chambers’ support for activism with Hamas financing fits neatly into this vision.
In June, eight anti-ICE protestors were sentenced for a combined 450 years for their roles in a riot outside a Texan immigration detention center. The severity of their punishments in large part hinged on prosecutors successfully arguing their use of Signal to communicate, and attendance at book clubs where left-wing literature was read, demonstrated they were part of a coordinated terrorist conspiracy. Chambers’ sealed indictment indicates the Trump administration’s war on Palestine solidarity is going global.
Ro Khanna says Israeli settlers held US delegation in West Bank
Al Mayadeen | July 11, 2026
US Democratic Representative Ro Khanna said armed Israeli settlers prevented his delegation from leaving a Palestinian area in the occupied West Bank, an incident he said exposed the realities of Israeli occupation and settler violence.
Khanna, who is considering seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, told Reuters that settlers carrying US-manufactured M4 rifles surrounded the group’s vehicle on Wednesday near Khirbet Zanuta in the southern West Bank.
The California congressman had been touring the remains of a Palestinian community whose residents were driven out following repeated attacks by Israeli settlers.
“We were at a village that Israeli settlers had destroyed, they had destroyed the school, they had destroyed that village, and we were just looking at it,” Khanna said.
“And these hoodlums come in with machine guns – M4, an American-made machine gun – and they detain us. They block off the road. And then they call the IDF and the IDF is on their side, not on the side of the Americans,” he added.
Cameron Kasky, an aide traveling with Khanna, said the delegation remained blocked for more than an hour and contacted the US Embassy in al-Quds seeking assistance. Police officers later arrived and cleared the way for the group to leave, according to Kasky.
The Israeli military acknowledged that settlers had obstructed vehicles near Khirbet Zanuta, saying troops and police were dispatched after receiving a report from the area.
“Upon their arrival, the troops dispersed the Israeli civilians and allowed the vehicles to continue on their way,” the military said.
West Bank trip shapes possible 2028 bid
Khanna’s visit comes as divisions over US support for “Israel” deepen inside the Democratic Party, particularly amid the ongoing genocide in Gaza and escalating settler attacks across the occupied West Bank.
He is the second possible Democratic presidential contender to visit the region this week. Former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said during a visit to Tel Aviv that Israeli policies toward Palestinians were weakening public support for the US-Israeli alliance.
Asked whether he intended to seek the presidency in 2028, Khanna said, “I’m strongly considering it and I’m more resolved to consider it after this trip.”
The lawmaker chose not to visit Israeli officials during the trip, instead taking part in a Palestinian-led program focused solely on the occupied West Bank.
Khanna said the decision was intended to provide a direct view of the consequences of the occupation without the tightly managed itinerary often arranged for visiting US politicians.
“If you’re unwilling to speak up for Palestinian human rights, if you’re unwilling to speak up against the genocide in Gaza, the apartheid in the West Bank, then you are morally compromised,” Khanna said.
From the outskirts of Turmus Ayya, a Palestinian town where many residents hold US citizenship, Khanna also criticized senior figures within his party for failing to understand the political significance of Palestine among Democratic voters.
He said the Democratic establishment was “clueless about how much of a moral test Palestine, Gaza and Israel have become.”
Democratic support for ‘Israel’ declines
Public backing for “Israel” among Democratic voters has fallen considerably in recent years. A Reuters/Ipsos poll cited in the report found that its favorability rating among Democrats dropped from 59% in 2018 to 22% in May.
The shift has begun influencing Democratic primary races, with several lawmakers facing challenges over their support for the Israeli regime and Washington’s continued military assistance.
A growing number of Democratic members of Congress have called for restrictions or an end to US weapons transfers to “Israel,” which receives approximately $3.8 billion in annual American military aid.
That support includes funding for firearms such as M4 rifles, as well as missile interception systems used by the Israeli occupation during its war on Iran.
US-supplied weaponry involved in armed settler violence
Khanna’s comments drew a direct connection between US-supplied weaponry and armed settler violence in the West Bank, where Palestinians are subjected to attacks, forced displacement, land seizures and restrictions on movement.
Approximately three million Palestinians live in the occupied West Bank alongside around 500,000 Israeli settlers.
The United Nations and most governments consider Israeli settlements illegal under international law, particularly under provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibiting an occupying power from transferring its civilian population into occupied territory.
The Israeli government rejects that position and describes the West Bank as disputed land, while Palestinians regard the territory, together with the Gaza Strip and occupied eastern al-Quds, as part of their future state.
Khanna’s trip signals that opposition to Washington’s unconditional support for “Israel” could become a central issue in the Democratic presidential contest ahead of 2028.
Somaliland jails musician without trial over al-Quds song
Al Mayadeen| July 11, 2026
Security forces in the breakaway region of Somaliland have detained young musician Khalid Mohamud Abdillahi, widely known as Khalid Kamil, after he recorded a song about occupied al-Quds, Hiiraan Online reported, citing his family.
Kamil has been held without trial for the past two weeks, his brother, Abdimajid Mohamud Abdillahi, said Thursday.
Abdimajid said intelligence officers arrested the musician at his home in Hargeisa before transferring him to the Criminal Investigation Department. He said Kamil was later moved to the central prison.
“They arrested Khalid at his home,” Abdimajid said. “The intelligence accused him of singing a song about Jerusalem that he had not yet released.”
Family questions basis for arrest
Abdimajid said authorities informed the family that Kamil was being detained because of the song but maintained that its content was unrelated to Somaliland.
“The security services told us that Khalid was being held for a song, but since the song was not about Somaliland, but about Jerusalem, we saw that someone was pushing or behind the arrest,” Abdimajid stressed.
Opposition party condemns detention
Somaliland’s opposition KAAH party denounced the arrest on Thursday, describing it as an infringement on fundamental freedoms and part of a broader campaign to suppress criticism of the breakaway government’s policy toward “Israel”.
“The arrest of artists, journalists and citizens for expressing their views and creativity undermines the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the constitution,” the party said.
KAAH urged the government to release Kamil immediately and halt intimidation targeting artists and members of the creative community.
The party added that democratic governance should be grounded in respect for the rule of law and freedom of expression rather than arrests and repression.
Previous arrests linked to ‘Israel’ recognition debate
Somaliland has previously detained religious leaders, traditional elders, journalists, and youth activists who opposed the prospect of Israeli recognition of Somaliland. Several of those detained were later released without trial.
The song, which has not been officially released but has circulated on social media, praises occupied al-Quds and highlights the city’s religious importance.
According to Kamil’s brother, the lyrics include lines stating that al-Quds “has been stolen” and criticizing those who remain silent about this crime.
Arrest follows opening of ‘Somaliland mission’ in al-Quds
The detention comes after Somaliland opened a diplomatic mission in occupied al-Quds in June, six months after “Israel” reportedly recognized Somaliland as an “independent state”.
The mission, located in a technology hub in the western part of occupied al-Quds, was inaugurated during an official visit by the regional president of the breakaway region of Somaliland, Abdirahman Mohamed Abdillahi, to “Israel”.
During the visit, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there was a “deep spiritual connection” between the two sides.
Somalia’s federal government, which regards Somaliland as part of its territory, condemned the engagement with “Israel” and said any contact with the separatist administration violated Somalia’s sovereignty.
Somaliland declared independence from Somalia in 1991 but has not secured broad international recognition. Somalia continues to maintain that Somaliland remains part of the Federal Republic of Somalia.
Dressen v. Flaherty: Vaccine Censorship Case Goes to Appeal
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | July 10, 2026
Federal officials set out to erase the online voices of Americans who said Covid vaccines had hurt them. A new appeal asks the Fifth Circuit to give those Americans their day in court.
The New Civil Liberties Alliance filed its opening brief on July 7, asking the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to revive Dressen v. Flaherty.
We obtained a copy of the brief for you here.
A federal judge in Texas had thrown the case out before a single document changed hands in discovery. The suit accuses the Biden administration of running a joint government and private censorship operation against people who went online to talk about vaccine injuries.
Brianne Dressen alleges she was injured after she volunteered for an AstraZeneca vaccine trial. Shaun Barcavage, Kristi Dobbs, Nikki Holland, and Suzanna Newell each reportedly suffered serious, debilitating injuries after Covid vaccination. Ernest Ramirez was vaccinated without incident and then lost his healthy 16-year-old son five days after the boy received his first Pfizer dose. The autopsy pointed to an enlarged heart and myocarditis.
They did what people in pain tend to do. They went to social media to trade medical research, look for treatments, share hopeful stories, and find others who understood. For many of them, closed online support groups became a lifeline.
The government treated that lifeline as a threat. The Surgeon General’s Office, the CDC, HHS, DHS, CISA, and the White House leaned on social media companies to flag this speech as “misinformation,” shadow-ban it, or delete it outright.
The operation reached across agencies and into the platforms themselves, coercing and colluding with the companies that decide who gets to be heard.
Stanford supplied the machinery. The now-defunct Stanford Internet Observatory and its “Virality Project” tracked posts and handed the platforms lists of speech to suppress.
The Virality Project targeted Covid-vaccine speech that broke from the administration’s preferred policies, whether or not that speech was accurate. Real accounts of real injuries got flagged because they were inconvenient, not because they were false.
The censors were specific about their targets. Their tracking called out Bri Dressen by name. A woman reportedly injured in a vaccine trial, describing what happened to her own body, became something a federal effort wanted the public not to see.
None of that was enough for the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, which dismissed the case at the pleading stage. The plaintiffs had laid out a detailed factual account of a nationwide censorship conspiracy, and the court closed the door before discovery could begin.
NCLA’s brief says the district court got the law wrong in several ways. The judge set too narrow and exacting a bar on personal jurisdiction and used it to wave off the Stanford defendants and the individual government officials.
The court also misread the Supreme Court’s decision in Murthy v. Missouri, which weighed whether a different set of NCLA clients had shown enough to win a preliminary injunction. No injunction is being sought here, so that higher standard does not govern this case.
The brief argues, the court made a further error on the civil-rights conspiracy claim. It tossed the plaintiffs’ claim under 42 U.S. Code Section 1985(3) on the theory that they had not alleged racial discrimination. The statute never mentions race. It protects “any person or class of persons” stripped of their rights through an invidiously discriminatory conspiracy, and the Supreme Court has said the provision can reach non-racial classes.
“To call what happened to our clients ‘troubling’ is a massive understatement. After suffering devastating medical injuries following Covid vaccination, they turned to social media as a lifeline for support and connection with others who understood. Rather than compassion or aid, the Government responded with relentless censorship, maligning them as liars and conspiracy theorists and cutting off the lifelines that they depended on.
“Their only offense was that their lived experiences, pain, and even private conversations in online support groups contradicted the Administration’s preferred Covid-vaccine narrative. The cruelty and injustice are difficult to overstate,” said Casey Norman, Litigation Counsel at NCLA.
The appeal also presses a point the district court skipped over. Censorship harms more than the person silenced.
“We are confident the Fifth Circuit will correct the District Court’s numerous errors in dismissing the complaint, which included taking an inappropriately narrow view of personal jurisdiction and ignoring that not just speakers, but also potential listeners, suffer harm resulting from unlawful government censorship,” said Caitlin Moyna, Senior Litigation Counsel at NCLA.
The stakes reach past these six plaintiffs. If courts keep reading Murthy as a wall against every censorship suit, the government gains a template for silencing people with almost no risk of accountability.
“Lower courts are misapplying the Supreme Court’s Murthy v. Missouri decision, and the ruling below here is a prime example. The Murthy decision set a high bar for standing in the context of a preliminary injunction to stop future censorship. But no PI was sought here, so the Murthy standard is not applicable. If Bri Dressen cannot satisfy standing—when the defendants called her out by name in their censorship tracking—then no one will,” said Mark Chenoweth, President and Chief Legal Officer of NCLA.
According to NCLA, the campaign still burdens its clients’ ability to speak, to associate privately, and to exchange information with others in closed support groups.
The question in front of the Fifth Circuit is whether Americans silenced by their own government can even make their case to a jury, or whether the courthouse door stays shut before anyone looks at the evidence.
RT producer speaks out after UK detention
James Scott said the authorities questioned him for 2.5 hours, seized his devices, and are still investigating him
RT | July 9, 2026
An RT employee was detained and interrogated after arriving in the UK from Russia several days ago under the country’s counterterrorism laws.
James Scott said he traveled to Manchester to visit friends and family and watch World Cup matches when he was stopped by the border authorities and questioned for two and a half hours.
Speaking publicly for the first time after leaving the UK, Scott said the authorities seized his electronic devices, returning them several days later, and that he remains under investigation, which he called “ridiculous” and “absurd.”
Scott is the second RT journalist to be detained by the British authorities. Last year, Steve Sweeney, the head of RT’s Lebanon bureau, was briefly detained by counterterrorism officers at London Heathrow Airport and extensively questioned about his work for the Russian broadcaster.
Doctor faces up to 50-year jail sentence — Is it because he promoted monoclonal antibodies instead of COVID vaccines?
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | July 7, 2026
In 2021, Dr. Ron Elfenbein, a physician who operated FirstCall Medical Center in Maryland, went on Fox News to criticize the Biden administration’s policies limiting access to monoclonal antibodies. Speaking during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, Elfenbein insisted that monoclonal antibodies were effective in treating COVID-19.
Four months later, the federal government indicted Elfenbein on five counts of fraudulent coding and billing at his clinics, alleging that Elfenbein “upcoded” by billing for a higher level of treatment than provided.
But Elfenbein said he believes the charges were motivated by his support for monoclonal antibodies — and a federal judge agreed.
In August 2023, a jury found Elfenbein guilty. But in response to Elfenbein’s motion for acquittal, U.S. District Judge James K. Bredar threw out the jury’s verdict and acquitted Elfenbein in December 2023.
In his 93-page ruling, Bredar said the government did not present enough evidence to convict Elfenbein, instead relying on “loose definitions” and an “imperfect” set of standards governing medical coding.
“The evidence weighs so heavily in favor of the defendant that it would be unjust to enter judgment against him,” Bredar wrote.
“That kind of post-verdict acquittal is extraordinarily rare,” said Dr. Kirk Moore, a Utah plastic surgeon who last year was acquitted on federal charges that he issued falsified COVID-19 vaccination cards. “Judges almost never overturn juries. Bredar did it because the case was just that empty.”
Yet, in the final days of the Biden administration, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) appealed. In July 2025, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the original jury had enough evidence to convict Elfenbein and sent the case back to the trial court.
“The government doesn’t get to lose, apparently,” Moore said. “They just get to keep swinging, bullying their way through a judicial system that is now built for this exact purpose.”
In December 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Elfenbein’s appeal.
In an interview with The Defender, Elfenbein said that his new trial is scheduled for January 2027. He believes he is unfairly being targeted as a “whistleblower” who was trying to help the public during a global pandemic and who was charged despite a lack of evidence against him.
He faces up to 50 years in prison if convicted on all five charges.
Steve Kirsch, founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, said the case against Elfenbein is “inexplicable” and that there were no coding errors or any criminal intent.
“Nobody was harmed. No patient was harmed. No insurance company was harmed. The federal government was harmed,” Kirsch said — because promoting monoclonal antibodies undermined the government’s promotion of COVID-19 vaccines.
Government’s case ‘the height of bureaucratic arrogance’
According to Elfenbein, his network of clinics rapidly expanded operations early during the COVID-19 pandemic in response to “unprecedented” circumstances.
“No one really understood what to do. Everything was sort of ‘fly by the seat of your pants.’ So, we had to invent everything,” Elfenbein said. He cited the example of drive-up COVID-19 testing with provider evaluation, which he said his clinics were the first to offer in Maryland.
“At one point, we were seeing over 1,000 patients a day across six different or eight different sites. And we had to figure out how to accommodate that,” Elfenbein said.
Elfenbein said that at his drive-up testing sites and in his urgent care facilities, patients would communicate with practitioners virtually through a television screen and microphone. Their results would then be delivered electronically.
In 2021, Elfenbein began offering monoclonal antibodies to COVID-19 patients. At the request of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, he set up a monoclonal antibody clinic at FedEx Field outside of Washington, D.C.
In an April interview with The MAHA Report, Elfenbein said the clinics performed 5,000 infusions.
Monoclonal antibodies are produced in labs and designed to replicate the immune system’s response to pathogens. Elfenbein said the treatments — and his test-and-treat model, where patients would be tested and treated at the same site — were successful and became “the model for the entire country moving forward.”
“It was like battlefield medicine, just trying to improvise and do as much as you can and as much good as you can in as little amount of time as possible,” Elfenbein said.
Elfenbein said that despite their success in treating COVID-19 patients, the Biden administration significantly curtailed the use of monoclonal antibodies in December 2021, making it much more difficult for practitioners in certain states to obtain the treatment.
That same month, Elfenbein told Fox News that people were “going to die” as a result of not having access to monoclonal antibodies. He made similar remarks in an interview with Newsmax during this period.
“It’s just the height of bureaucratic arrogance, and it’s … horrible,” Elfenbein told Fox News at the time.
The ‘government’s looking to put me in jail for 50 years … over $250’
Four months later, in April 2022, Elfenbein was out with his son when he received a phone call from his clinic, informing him that two federal agents wanted to speak with him. He later learned that the DOJ planned to indict him on healthcare fraud charges.
While the circumstances of his indictment were initially unclear, Elfenbein said he learned during the pre-trial discovery phase that undercover agents posing as patients had visited his testing facilities after his Fox News interview.
The DOJ alleged that, in the case of five patients who visited Elfenbein’s testing facilities, insurers were charged more than they should have been for the level of treatment provided, as a result of “upcoding.”
According to Elfenbein, there are “four different codes you can pick from when you’re doing evaluation and management” of a patient, ranging from level 2 to level 5. “Normally, in most cases, you should get a bell curve” among the different levels, Elfenbein said. But during the pandemic, this changed.
“There’s a pandemic going on. We’re not seeing ankle sprains. We’re not seeing elbow sprains. We’re not seeing lacerations. We’re seeing COVID and that was it.”
Most COVID-19 patients were coded as level-4 patients, which he said was the norm across medical facilities during that time.
According to Healthcare Law Insights, the codes are imprecise, which “makes for difficult federal prosecutions.”
“There is purpose in [the] codes’ imprecision in that it allows physicians flexibility to exercise their best judgment given the multitude of factors that go into medical decision-making,” Healthcare Law Insights reported.
In the case of Elfenbein, the initial judge found a lack of evidence that Elfenbein’s level-4 coding was “objectively false.”
In an amicus brief filed on Elfenbein’s behalf in October 2024, the American Medical Association (AMA) agreed, writing, “Clinicians must be able to exercise their judgment without fear of inadvertently facing allegations of wrongdoing.”
Elfenbein said this is significant because the AMA developed the ICD-10 medical coding system that’s currently in use.
Elfenbein said:
“The American Medical Association owns that. Everybody uses ICD-10. And, by the way, there are over 69,000 possible codes in ICD-10. And the government alleged we chose the wrong code out of 69,000, five charts out of over 100,000, in the timeframe of the indictment during a global pandemic.”
Elfenbein said prosecutors couldn’t identify which code should have been assigned to those five patients instead of level 4, but that the difference between level 4 and level 3 amounts to approximately $50.
“The government’s looking to put me in jail for 50 years, destroy my life, take away my livelihood, over $250,” Elfenbein said.
“The … definitions for level-4 evaluation and management codes are inherently subjective — they depend on ‘medical decision-making’ complexity, not a stopwatch,” Moore said. “If you’re going to charge a man with fraud for using the wrong code, you should probably be able to say what the right code is. They couldn’t, wouldn’t and ultimately, didn’t.”
‘This is a case of shoot first and ask questions later’
Elfenbein told The Defender that while he does not have hard evidence proving that the DOJ’s case against him is retaliatory, the timing of his indictment shortly after his Fox News and Newsmax interviews is likely not coincidental.
“Temporally, I went on Fox News, and I got indicted almost to the day, four months later. Putting the two things together, it seems to make sense in my mind that this is what set them off,” Elfenbein said.
He suggested that the government’s case against him appeared to have been hastily constructed, further suggesting that the DOJ was targeting him on retaliatory grounds rather than on the strength of the evidence.
“They indicted me before they had the [patients’] charts. They didn’t even know what was in the charts,” Elfenbein said. Federal investigators did not speak to his business partners, who were responsible for billing, and never cross-examined a professional medical coder.
According to Elfenbein, the government’s own witnesses also undermined the DOJ’s case during the first trial. While prosecutors alleged that the five visits in question were too quick for the number of procedures that were coded, a government witness testified that “time is irrelevant for coding” and that the tests were “medically necessary.”
“This was a case where even the chief judge said, ‘This is a case of shoot first and ask questions later.’ No real investigation had been done,” Elfenbein said. “That’s pretty telling, for a federal judge to say that to the prosecution.”
Promotion of a non-vaccine treatment ‘posed a huge threat’
Elfenbein said he believes his public statements about the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies threatened the COVID-19 vaccine enterprise.
The COVID-19 shots were issued under emergency use authorization, which is customarily revoked once other effective treatments are identified and licensed.
Elfenbein said his clinics had become the largest supplier of monoclonal antibodies in the mid-Atlantic region, which “posed a huge threat.”
“It was a direct threat to the emergency use authorization of the vaccine,” he said. “I think I was the easiest fall guy … I was out all the time beating the drum, answering phone calls, talking to people, answering Facebook messages, taking questions, anything I could do to help.”
Moore agreed. “The monoclonal antibody ban was transparently about clearing the field for the vaccines. If there’s an effective early treatment available, the urgency to get jabbed drops considerably.”
By making monoclonal antibodies available despite government efforts to curtail their use, and by subsequently criticizing the government on that front, Elfenbein said he, in effect, became a whistleblower.
“I went on Fox News and I said, ‘The government doesn’t know what it’s doing, and it is gonna kill people.’ If that’s not a whistleblower, I don’t know what is.”
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
The end of anonymity in a state-verified internet
As governments tie online speech to real-world identities under the banner of child safety, the implications extend much farther
By Onur Ozersin | The Cradle | July 8, 2026
The internet, long framed as a space of relative freedom, is entering a period of structural change driven by governments acting in parallel.
A quieter process is underway across multiple jurisdictions. Authorities are introducing identity verification requirements tied to access and participation. These measures are presented as safeguards for minors, and a number have already been written into law.
From Canberra to Washington, London to Ankara and Abu Dhabi, governments are moving to dismantle the era of anonymous internet access, embedding age restrictions and verification protocols into law and platform design in what amounts to one of the most significant shifts the digital world has seen since its inception.
A coordinated turn
The emerging model links user profiles to verified identities, going beyond routine regulation and altering how expression functions online.
As every digital post becomes indelibly linked to a real-world identity and added to a permanent database, the concept of online privacy is fundamentally inverted. Anonymity is no longer viewed as a civil right, but rather as an illicit activity.
Momentum accelerated in the UK in 2025, where more than 12,000 individuals faced detention and penalties linked to online activity.
A similar trend is unfolding in the US, where states such as Florida, Utah, and California have pushed forward with localized identity mandates. Progress on a federal equivalent, the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), remains under congressional debate.
The EU has moved along a parallel track through the Digital Services Act (DSA). Presented as a regulatory framework, it has taken on an enforcement function in practice. Denmark, Greece, Italy, and Spain have been selected as early testing grounds for verification systems.
By 2026, the focus had begun to widen. The debate moved from child protection toward the regulation of political expression. In Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated in early May, “I want to see the real names of everyone who expresses an opinion against us online. They should not hide behind anonymous accounts.”
Turkiye introduced comparable measures in late April. Parliament approved identity checks and a social media ban for children under 15. Following publication on 1 May, platforms were given nine months to comply.
Justice Minister Akin Gurlek described the internet as “digital chaos” and said the law would apply to platforms with more than one million users. Penalties for non-compliance include aggressive enforcement actions, such as financial sanctions, bandwidth throttling, and total network blocking.
The UAE adopted its own framework in June 2026 through Cabinet Decision No. 106. It set an official age threshold for social media use in the Arab world. Platforms are required to integrate with UAE Pass or deploy biometric verification systems. A 12-month transition period has been granted, with enforcement measures including fines and possible service suspension beginning July 2027.
While neighboring Gulf states have not yet codified specific age restrictions or identity verification mandates, parallel legislative frameworks are highly anticipated. This is particularly true for countries boasting advanced digitalization infrastructures, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Regulators are also cracking down on the primary tool used to bypass these digital borders: VPN services. European Commission Vice President Henna Virkkunen warned that identity verification measures must not be circumvented via VPNs, aligned with existing plans in France and the UK to restrict private network routing.
This crackdown marks a dramatic ideological reversal. Where European leaders previously criticized China’s rigorous internet restrictions under the banner of free speech, they are now deploying the very same enforcement mechanisms within their own borders.
Verification as a condition of access
Several proposals would require users to confirm their identity within fixed timeframes, in some cases as short as 72 hours. Failure to comply could result in account suspension and deletion of associated data.
The choice is reduced to two options. Users either attach their digital history to their legal identity or lose access to accumulated networks and content.
This requirement effectively weaponizes your entire digital past. A political argument you had years ago, an obscure question asked on an old forum, or a reckless comment made in the heat of youth will now follow you forever, indelibly stamped onto your official legal identity.
Initially restricted to government agencies, this searchable database could eventually be accessed by insurance corporations and future employers. Cross-border data sharing will likely become standard practice during international travel applications.
A possible scenario illustrates the trajectory. A visa application could include a request for a digital profile from a country of origin. Automated systems would assess that data before any human review.
The EU has already imposed sanctions on journalists covering certain geopolitical issues, including those expressing pro-Palestine views or positions aligned with Russian policy.
The scope of regulation is not limited to public content. The EU has continued to pursue its “Chat Control” initiative, which aims to enable scanning of private communications. After a temporary exemption expired in April 2026, the Council moved on 2 July to restore monitoring provisions through 2028.
This issue has prompted intense resistance from privacy advocates and a coalition of over 500 cryptographers, who warn that requiring platforms to pre-scan message content inherently compromises end-to-end encryption, effectively transforming private messaging spaces into permanently monitored state domains.
Speech under observation
Officials maintain that these measures apply to social media. The infrastructure being built has broader potential applications.
It is only a matter of time before fingerprint, retina, and facial scans become mandatory for every single action you take online.
Once that threshold is crossed, background screening will extend far beyond traditional criminal records; instead, an individual’s digital profile will become the primary determinant of their professional career. This shift seamlessly enables AI algorithms to scan every digital trace left online, pre-emptively labeling users as “risky” or “prone to crime.”
This framework inevitably chills public discourse; criticizing state policy, exposing corruption, or merely asking a question will be permanently appended to a citizen’s digital dossier. Consequently, state authorities will no longer need to actively suppress free speech.
When the penalty for dissent risks the destruction of an individual’s lifelong professional achievements, self-censorship manifests organically.
A comparable pattern is visible offline. More than 300 international students involved in pro-Palestine protests at US universities faced visa revocations and deportation last year. If visible protest carries such outcomes, the implications of permanent digital traceability are likely to be more far-reaching.
Speaking to The Cradle, journalist and technology policy expert Fusun Nebil frames the issue in broader terms:
“Perhaps the most critical point in this debate is that the internet is no longer merely a means of communication; it has also become people’s digital memory and identity. It is not enough for governments to cite seemingly legitimate justifications such as child safety, combating disinformation, and fighting cybercrime. We must seriously discuss how a digital order that completely eliminates anonymity will exert pressure on freedom of expression, political pluralism, and the culture of social criticism in the long term.”
From open forum to managed space
The internet has long functioned as a space where citizens learn and shape ideas through open discussion, progressing from early forum sites to modern social networks. However, under a system where every word becomes an official record, the survival of satire, humor, and intellectual exchange is thrown into question.
In a framework where a joke cracked at age 22 can be held up as evidence against an individual at age 40, the internet will cease to be an environment for exploration and instead transform into a vast courtroom where any spoken word can be leveraged as an indictment.
Today, traditional media such as newspapers and television channels are frequently controlled or influenced by powerful interest groups in many countries. As a result, social media platforms have become the primary spaces where citizens can freely exchange ideas.
However, introducing mandatory identity verification will almost certainly restrict the diversity of opinions in these remaining open environments.
In June 2026, the UK government launched a consultation on regulating content distribution on platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. The proposals include requirements for algorithms to prioritize material from designated public service broadcasters and approved outlets.
This introduces a tiered structure within platforms. Certain sources receive visibility by design.
Exit routes and unintended outcomes
Mandating online identity verification could not only alter the nature of social media platforms, but also spark a mass exodus to the dark web. Ironically, the primary victims of this shift will be the very children these laws are intended to protect.
When governments force tech giants like Meta, X, and TikTok to implement identity checks, ordinary citizens who value privacy and young people in particular may turn to the dark web. Although mainstream platforms face frequent criticism, their moderation teams and AI systems actively remove the vast majority of harmful content.
In contrast, dark web networks lack any oversight or community guidelines. When a teenager uses the Tor network to bypass restrictions, they would not just be chatting with friends; they would enter an unmonitored environment where exploitation risks are exponentially higher than on monitored platforms.
Data concentration and exposure
The accumulation of identity data introduces another layer of risk. Large databases of biometric and personal information present attractive targets for cyberattacks.
In April 2026, concerns surfaced around the EU Age Verification App shortly after its code was made public. Security researchers identified weaknesses in its structure.
Independent specialists, including cybersecurity consultant Paul Moore and French cryptographer Olivier Blazy, immediately identified critical architectural and design vulnerabilities within the framework.
Addressing EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen directly on X, Moore issued a stark warning: “Seriously @vonderleyen – this product will be the catalyst for an enormous breach at some point. It’s just a matter of time.”
Telegram founder Pavel Durov also joined the debate, claiming that these security vulnerabilities are a direct result of the system’s fundamental design rather than a simple error: “The EU age verification app was hackable by design – it trusted the device (that’s instant game over).”
A monitored horizon
Although identity verification on the internet may seem like a step taken to protect children, whether it leads to a safe harbor or a dangerous cliff depends on how it is implemented. If the solution is based solely on enacting bans and collecting ID numbers, free communication will inevitably be pushed toward dark web networks where oversight is almost impossible.
The path to protecting children is not to lock digital doors and hand the keys over to the government. Rather, it lies in ensuring that the open internet continues to provide a space where citizens can freely express ideas without the pressure of self-censorship, while making it safe through moderation, education, and transparency.
Otherwise, by the 2030s, we may find ourselves facing not a generation protected from the harmful effects of the internet, but a generation that has grown up in the lawlessness of the dark web.

