Skip to content
Breaking News Alert Report: DHS Group Called Being 'Religious' An 'Indicator' Of Domestic Terrorism

Twitter Is Censoring Sean Davis For Quoting PA’s Supreme Court Decision Allowing Post-Election Ballots

Twitter censorship

Big Tech is at it again, this time with Twitter censoring The Federalist’s co-founder Sean Davis. His offense? Quoting an official Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision. 


Big Tech is at it again, this time with Twitter censoring The Federalist’s co-founder Sean Davis. His offense? Accurately summarizing an official Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision.

“Pennsylvania’s top court said that all ballots received after election day — even those without a postmark — must be assumed to have been cast by election day,” Davis said, quote-tweeting National Review Senior Writer David Harsanyi, who noted, “PA is allowing post-election day ballots. It’s a fact.”

Twitter flagged Davis’s tweet because according to the Big Tech overlords, “Some or all of the content shared in this tweet is disputed and might be misleading about an election or other civic process.” Now, in order to view the tweet, users must click past a warning screen.

Nothing about Davis’s tweet, however, is “disputed.” It’s taken straight from a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling regarding ballot-counting.

According to a footnote in the Supreme Court decision, the Pennsylvania secretary of state recommended that the court “order that ballots mailed by voters by 8:00 p.m. on Election Day be counted if they are otherwise valid and received by the county boards of election by November 6, 2020. Ballots received within this period that lack a postmark or other proof of mailing, or for which the postmark or other proof of mailing is illegible, should enjoy a presumption that they were mailed by Election Day” (emphasis mine).

The state Supreme Court endorsed the secretary’s plan, characterizing a postmark requirement on late ballots as voter disenfranchisement. As Davis noted in another tweet, the court rubber-stamped the Democratic secretary’s agenda to count indisputably late ballots without a postmark and with zero proof that they were legally cast by Nov. 3.

That didn’t stop Twitter from censoring Davis’s tweet, an accurate summation of the official court ruling.

Twitter has been trigger-happy with its censorship of conservative voices throughout coverage of the election. In fact, this wasn’t even the only one of Davis’s accurate tweets that got suppressed. Twitter also flagged a tweet pointing out that in the middle of the night, Michigan suddenly reported an increase of more than 130,000 votes for Biden with not a single-vote increase for Trump — and no explanation.

“So while everyone was asleep and after everyone went home, Democrats in Michigan magically found a trove of 138,339 votes, and all 138,339 of those ‘votes’ magically went to Biden? That doesn’t look suspicious at all,” Davis tweeted before Twitter censored it.

Twitter even censored a tweet from the president on election night.

“We are up BIG, but they are trying to STEAL the Election,” President Trump said in the suppressed tweet. “We will never let them do it. Votes cannot be cast after the Polls are closed!”

The tech giant did not, however, censor a tweet from Democrat Joe Biden claiming he would win the election.

The partisan and erroneous censorship follows Big Tech’s pattern of limiting free speech — especially of right-wing media outlets and the President of the United States — with Facebook, Twitter, and Google at the helm.

Another recent example occurred when the New York Post reported a bombshell Biden scandal in the run-up to the election. Twitter and Facebook censored the report, which revealed damning emails retrieved from a laptop hard drive allegedly owned by Biden’s son Hunter, with Twitter blocking the link to the story from being tweeted or even shared in private messages. Twitter locked the Post’s account for two weeks leading up to the election after it tried to tweet the story, which verified that the former vice president had lied about never having discussed Hunter’s overseas business dealings with his son or anyone else.