Protestors march outside of Justice Brett Kavanaugh's home following SCOTUS decision
Protestors chant outside of Justice Brett Kavanaugh's home after Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
Supreme Court Justices, pro-life pregnancy centers and like-minded conservatives have faced online threats from the left since Roe v. Wade was overturned last month and Twitter has allowed many violent messages to remain on its platform.
The conservative Media Research Center found 67 posts threatening or calling for violence against Supreme Court Justices from June 24 through July 8 alone, representing the two-week period immediately following the court's opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overturned the landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade.
The 67 threatening social media posts came across TikTok, Twitter and Instagram, with Twitter being the home for the majority of them, according to MRC Free Speech America writer Catherine Salgado.
Twitter has allowed many violent messages to remain on its platform. ((AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)
PRO-CHOICE PROTESTERS TARGET SUPREME COURT JUSTICE KAVANAUGH AT DC STEAKHOUSE: REPORT
Salgado noted that some accounts responsible for threats – such as Jane’s Revenge, a far-left group that claimed to be attacking and threatening pro-life organizations – have been suspended by Twitter but many others remain.
"Antifa Sacramento also celebrated pro-abortion attacks on pro-life centers," Salgado wrote.
As of Wednesday morning, the account still had publicly available videos celebrating the "firebombing" of anti-abortion centers. Other tweets call for violence.
"For instance, one unverified Twitter user tweeted, ‘we gotta bring back assassination.’ Another user responded, ‘I’ve literally been saying like someone gotta bring this sh[*]t back because clearly it was working before.’ Both tweets remain uncensored on Twitter. A tweet with a Molotov cocktail recipe is also uncensored, along with a hope that someone shoot Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas ‘in the head,’" Salgado wrote.
The Molotov Cocktail tweet included the caption, "Feel free to throw at a filthy policeman who defies the will of the people," beneath the recipe.
Protesters march past Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's home on June 8, 2022 in Chevy Chase, Maryland. An armed man was recently arrested near Kavanaugh's home. ((Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images))
Another tweet pondered, "Can we go burn down the Supreme Court[?]"
"Ironically, some leftists explicitly called for the brutality Democrats and leftist media have accused conservatives of committing. ‘So... insurrection?’ tweeted an unverified account. Another user quote-tweeted the suggestion and commented, ‘If brave American people [sic] willing,’" Salgado added. "Twitter has not censored the tweets."
Twitter did not immediately respond to a request for comment when asked why the posts are allowed to remain online. The platform has a hateful conduct policy that prohibits "violence against or directly attack[ing] or threaten[ing] other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, caste, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease," and threatens to suspend accounts for violating the policy.
A drumline marched outside of Kupreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's house after an alleged assassination attempt. (Fox News)
Internet Accountability Project founder Mike Davis, a former law clerk for Justice Neil Gorsuch, believes things would play out much differently if liberal justices and their left-leaning allies were being targeted.
"Twitter once again shows its true left-wing colors by allowing threats against Supreme Court justices, pro-life pregnancy centers and Catholic churches to flourish on its platform," Davis told Fox News Digital.
"Just imagine if a group of White nationalists harassed and intimidated Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson while she's deciding the upcoming affirmative action case at the Supreme Court," Davis continued. "These big tech platforms have gatekeeping power over information and commerce online, and it is long past time for Republican lawmakers to put constituents first instead of their big tech donors, and break up these big tech monopolists."
Not all threats against Supreme Court Justices occur online.
Last month, a man was arrested outside the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh after traveling from California with plans to assassinate him, and that was before the ruling came down that showed Kavanaugh sided with the majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Since then, he’s been harassed at an upscale steakhouse and regularly has liberal protestors causing a ruckus outside his home. Many of the protests have been promoted and glorified on Twitter.
Davis believes that a social media platform would simply "hide behind Section 230 immunity" if threats promoted on the internet turned into real-world violence. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 states that "no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The section has been pivotal in the rise of today's social media giants by allowing not only Internet service providers – but also Google, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and others – to be shielded from liability from content posted on their platforms by third parties, in most cases.
"Congress needs to repeal the Section 230 immunity, it has long outlived its purpose," Davis said.