![\"mercola](\"https:\/\/media.mercola.com\/ImageServer\/Public\/2021\/November\/Nonlead\/mercola-sues-sen-warren-thumb.jpg\")
<\/div>\nSTORY AT-A-GLANCE<\/h3>\n\n\n- In early September 2021, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to Andy Jassy, chief executive officer of Amazon.com, demanding an \u201cimmediate review\u201d of Amazon\u2019s algorithms to weed out books peddling \u201cCOVID misinformation,\u201d stressing that Amazon\u2019s sale of such books was \u201cpotentially unlawful\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n
- Warren specifically singled out my book, \u201cThe Truth About COVID-19,\u201d co-written with Ronnie Cummins, founder and director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), as a prime example of \u201chighly-ranked and favorably-tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures\u201d that she wants banned<\/span><\/li>\n
- As a government official, it is illegal for Warren to violate the U.S. Constitution, and pressuring private businesses to do it for her is not a legal workaround<\/span><\/li>\n
- Cummins and I, along with our publisher, Chelsea Green Publishing, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who wrote our foreword, are now suing Warren, both in her official and personal capacities, for violating our First Amendment rights and scaring book sellers into pulling and\/or suppressing sales of our book<\/span><\/li>\n
- Ironically, Warren\u2019s claims of misinformation are themselves misinformation that puts lives at risk<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
In early September 2021, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren sent a letter1<\/span><\/sup>\u00a0to Andy Jassy, chief executive officer of Amazon.com, demanding an \u201cimmediate review\u201d of Amazon\u2019s algorithms to weed out books peddling \u201cCOVID misinformation,\u201d stressing that Amazon\u2019s sale of such books was \u201cpotentially unlawful.\u201d2<\/span>,<\/sup>3<\/span>,<\/sup>4<\/span><\/sup><\/p>\nWarren specifically singled out my book, \u201cThe Truth About COVID-19,\u201d co-written with Ronnie Cummins, founder and director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), as a prime example of \u201chighly-ranked and favorably-tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures\u201d that she wanted banned.<\/p>\n
\u201cDr. Mercola has been described as \u2018the most influential spreader of coronavirus misinformation online,\u201d\u00a0<\/em>Warren wrote,5<\/span><\/sup>\u00a0adding:\u00a0\u201cNot only was this book the top result when searching either \u2018COVID-19\u2019 or \u2018vaccine\u2019 in the categories of \u2018All Departments\u2019 and \u2018Books\u2019; it was tagged as a \u2018Best Seller\u2019 by Amazon and the \u2018#1 Best Seller\u2019 in the \u2018Political Freedom\u2019 category.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nThe book perpetuates dangerous conspiracies about COVID-19 and false and misleading information about vaccines. It asserts that vitamin C, vitamin D and quercetin \u2026 can prevent COVID-19 infection \u2026 And the book contends that vaccines cannot be trusted …\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nWarren Fancies Herself Above the Law<\/h2>\n
Warren should know that as a government official, it is illegal for her violate the U.S. Constitution, and pressuring private businesses to do it for her is not a legal workaround.<\/p>\n
Since she willfully ignores the law, Cummins and I, along with our publisher, Chelsea Green Publishing, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who wrote our foreword, are suing Warren, both in her official and personal capacities, for violating our First Amendment rights. The federal lawsuit, in which Warren is listed as the sole defendant, was filed in the state of Washington. As noted in our complaint:<\/p>\n
\n<\/div>\n\u201cOnce upon a time, the First Amendment was understood to guarantee that books challenging governmental orthodoxy could be sold without fear of governmental intimidation or reprisal.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nAlmost sixty years ago, in Bantam Books v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58 (1963), the Supreme Court held that state officials violated the First Amendment by sending letters to booksellers warning that the sale of certain named books was potentially unlawful.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nThe \u2018vice\u2019 in such letters and in the \u2018veiled threat\u2019 of legal repercussions they communicated, explained the Court, is that they allow government to achieve censorship while doing an end-run around the judiciary, \u2018provid[ing] no safeguards whatever against the suppression of … constitutionally protected\u2019 speech, thus effecting an unconstitutional \u2018prior restraint.\u2019<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nIt made no difference that the officials who sent the letter lacked the \u2018power to apply formal legal sanctions\u2019 \u2014 i.e., that the officials did not themselves have the power to sanction or prosecute the booksellers in any way. Indeed this fact made the unconstitutionality more apparent.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nThe officials \u2018are not law enforcement officers; they do not pretend that they are qualified to give or that they attempt to give distributors only fair legal advice … [T]hey acted … not to advise but to suppress.\u2019<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nIt also made no difference, the Court expressly found, that the letters were framed as mere \u2018exhort[ation]\u2019 or that the booksellers were in theory \u2018free\u2019 to ignore the letters, because the officials had \u2018deliberately set about to achieve the suppression of publications deemed \u2018objectionable\u2019,\u2019 and \u2018people do not lightly disregard public officers\u2019 veiled threats.\u2019<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nToday, certain members of the United States Congress have apparently forgotten, or think they are above, the law set forth in Bantam Books.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\nWarren\u2019s Attack on Constitutionally Protected Speech<\/h2>\n
There\u2019s no doubt our book, \u201cThe Truth About COVID-19,\u201d is constitutionally protected speech, and that Warren\u2019s letter is calling on Amazon to suppress protected speech.<\/p>\n
In our book, we share viewpoints, ideas, opinions, verifiable facts and factual hypotheses that our federal government just so happens to disfavor, as it counters their chosen narrative that SARS-CoV-2 emerged naturally, cannot be prevented by any means other than experimental gene therapy, and cannot be treated by any other means than certain experimental and exorbitantly costly drugs.<\/p>\n
Since the start of the pandemic, government has systematically sought to suppress the kind of information shared in our book, using the same tactic as Warren used against us here \u2014 warning Internet-based companies that if they don\u2019t censor these views, the full weight of the government\u2019s wrath will be turned against them. As explained in our complaint:<\/p>\n
\u201cThe term \u2018vaccine misinformation\u2019 as Warren uses it is propagandistic and false. As she uses it, \u2018vaccine misinformation\u2019 refers to any speech challenging the safety and efficacy of the COVID vaccines, even when that speech consists of factually accurate information or protected opinion …<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nOn September 10, 2021, as a direct result of Warren\u2019s letter, a major national bookseller chain, Barnes and Noble, notified the publisher of The Truth About COVID-19 by email that it would no longer sell the work as an e-book. Barnes and Noble has \u2014 for now \u2014 reversed that decision.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nIt is impossible for Plaintiffs to know with certainty whether, as a result of Warren\u2019s letter, Amazon is now covertly demoting, downgrading, or otherwise suppressing The Truth About COVID-19 in numerous ways that would be hidden from view, but Plaintiffs believe that Amazon is in fact covertly taking such action.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nEven if no bookseller in the country had yielded to Warren\u2019s threats, her letter would still be actionable as a clear violation of the First Amendment.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nIn Backpage.com, LLC v. Dart, 807 F.3d 229 (7th Cir. 2015) (Posner, J.), relying on Bantam Books, the Court held that a governmental official \u2018violates a plaintiff\u2019s First Amendment rights\u2019 if by \u2018threat\u2019 or \u2018intimidation\u2019 the official attempts to induce \u2018a third party\u2019 to stop \u2018publishing or otherwise disseminating the plaintiff\u2019s message,\u2019 and emphasized that \u2018such a threat is actionable and thus can be enjoined even if it turns out to be empty \u2014 the victim ignores it, and the threatener folds his tent.\u2019<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nSuch threats go \u2018by the name of \u2018prior restraint,\u2019 and a prior restraint is the quintessential first-amendment violation.\u2019 Accordingly, Plaintiffs ask this Court to vindicate clearly established law, to vindicate Plaintiffs\u2019 constitutional rights, to vindicate the First Amendment itself, by declaring Warren\u2019s conduct unconstitutional and by enjoining her from repeating such conduct in future.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\nWarren Calls Out \u2018Misinformation\u2019 With Misinformation<\/h2>\n
In our complaint, we also emphasize the fact that Warren\u2019s claims of misinformation are themselves misinformation. For example, Warren claims our book falsely \u201casserts that … vitamin D … can prevent COVID-19 infection.\u201d According to Warren, this claim has no scientific basis. This is clearly and verifiably false as there are many studies, published in 2020 and 2021, supporting this claim.<\/p>\n
- \n
- In early September 2021, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to Andy Jassy, chief executive officer of Amazon.com, demanding an \u201cimmediate review\u201d of Amazon\u2019s algorithms to weed out books peddling \u201cCOVID misinformation,\u201d stressing that Amazon\u2019s sale of such books was \u201cpotentially unlawful\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n
- Warren specifically singled out my book, \u201cThe Truth About COVID-19,\u201d co-written with Ronnie Cummins, founder and director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), as a prime example of \u201chighly-ranked and favorably-tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures\u201d that she wants banned<\/span><\/li>\n
- As a government official, it is illegal for Warren to violate the U.S. Constitution, and pressuring private businesses to do it for her is not a legal workaround<\/span><\/li>\n
- Cummins and I, along with our publisher, Chelsea Green Publishing, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who wrote our foreword, are now suing Warren, both in her official and personal capacities, for violating our First Amendment rights and scaring book sellers into pulling and\/or suppressing sales of our book<\/span><\/li>\n
- Ironically, Warren\u2019s claims of misinformation are themselves misinformation that puts lives at risk<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\nIn early September 2021, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren sent a letter1<\/span><\/sup>\u00a0to Andy Jassy, chief executive officer of Amazon.com, demanding an \u201cimmediate review\u201d of Amazon\u2019s algorithms to weed out books peddling \u201cCOVID misinformation,\u201d stressing that Amazon\u2019s sale of such books was \u201cpotentially unlawful.\u201d2<\/span>,<\/sup>3<\/span>,<\/sup>4<\/span><\/sup><\/p>\n
Warren specifically singled out my book, \u201cThe Truth About COVID-19,\u201d co-written with Ronnie Cummins, founder and director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), as a prime example of \u201chighly-ranked and favorably-tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures\u201d that she wanted banned.<\/p>\n
\u201cDr. Mercola has been described as \u2018the most influential spreader of coronavirus misinformation online,\u201d\u00a0<\/em>Warren wrote,5<\/span><\/sup>\u00a0adding:\u00a0\u201cNot only was this book the top result when searching either \u2018COVID-19\u2019 or \u2018vaccine\u2019 in the categories of \u2018All Departments\u2019 and \u2018Books\u2019; it was tagged as a \u2018Best Seller\u2019 by Amazon and the \u2018#1 Best Seller\u2019 in the \u2018Political Freedom\u2019 category.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The book perpetuates dangerous conspiracies about COVID-19 and false and misleading information about vaccines. It asserts that vitamin C, vitamin D and quercetin \u2026 can prevent COVID-19 infection \u2026 And the book contends that vaccines cannot be trusted …\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Warren Fancies Herself Above the Law<\/h2>\n
Warren should know that as a government official, it is illegal for her violate the U.S. Constitution, and pressuring private businesses to do it for her is not a legal workaround.<\/p>\n
Since she willfully ignores the law, Cummins and I, along with our publisher, Chelsea Green Publishing, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who wrote our foreword, are suing Warren, both in her official and personal capacities, for violating our First Amendment rights. The federal lawsuit, in which Warren is listed as the sole defendant, was filed in the state of Washington. As noted in our complaint:<\/p>\n
\n
<\/div>\n\u201cOnce upon a time, the First Amendment was understood to guarantee that books challenging governmental orthodoxy could be sold without fear of governmental intimidation or reprisal.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Almost sixty years ago, in Bantam Books v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58 (1963), the Supreme Court held that state officials violated the First Amendment by sending letters to booksellers warning that the sale of certain named books was potentially unlawful.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The \u2018vice\u2019 in such letters and in the \u2018veiled threat\u2019 of legal repercussions they communicated, explained the Court, is that they allow government to achieve censorship while doing an end-run around the judiciary, \u2018provid[ing] no safeguards whatever against the suppression of … constitutionally protected\u2019 speech, thus effecting an unconstitutional \u2018prior restraint.\u2019<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It made no difference that the officials who sent the letter lacked the \u2018power to apply formal legal sanctions\u2019 \u2014 i.e., that the officials did not themselves have the power to sanction or prosecute the booksellers in any way. Indeed this fact made the unconstitutionality more apparent.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The officials \u2018are not law enforcement officers; they do not pretend that they are qualified to give or that they attempt to give distributors only fair legal advice … [T]hey acted … not to advise but to suppress.\u2019<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It also made no difference, the Court expressly found, that the letters were framed as mere \u2018exhort[ation]\u2019 or that the booksellers were in theory \u2018free\u2019 to ignore the letters, because the officials had \u2018deliberately set about to achieve the suppression of publications deemed \u2018objectionable\u2019,\u2019 and \u2018people do not lightly disregard public officers\u2019 veiled threats.\u2019<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Today, certain members of the United States Congress have apparently forgotten, or think they are above, the law set forth in Bantam Books.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
<\/div>\nWarren\u2019s Attack on Constitutionally Protected Speech<\/h2>\n
There\u2019s no doubt our book, \u201cThe Truth About COVID-19,\u201d is constitutionally protected speech, and that Warren\u2019s letter is calling on Amazon to suppress protected speech.<\/p>\n
In our book, we share viewpoints, ideas, opinions, verifiable facts and factual hypotheses that our federal government just so happens to disfavor, as it counters their chosen narrative that SARS-CoV-2 emerged naturally, cannot be prevented by any means other than experimental gene therapy, and cannot be treated by any other means than certain experimental and exorbitantly costly drugs.<\/p>\n
Since the start of the pandemic, government has systematically sought to suppress the kind of information shared in our book, using the same tactic as Warren used against us here \u2014 warning Internet-based companies that if they don\u2019t censor these views, the full weight of the government\u2019s wrath will be turned against them. As explained in our complaint:<\/p>\n
\u201cThe term \u2018vaccine misinformation\u2019 as Warren uses it is propagandistic and false. As she uses it, \u2018vaccine misinformation\u2019 refers to any speech challenging the safety and efficacy of the COVID vaccines, even when that speech consists of factually accurate information or protected opinion …<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
On September 10, 2021, as a direct result of Warren\u2019s letter, a major national bookseller chain, Barnes and Noble, notified the publisher of The Truth About COVID-19 by email that it would no longer sell the work as an e-book. Barnes and Noble has \u2014 for now \u2014 reversed that decision.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It is impossible for Plaintiffs to know with certainty whether, as a result of Warren\u2019s letter, Amazon is now covertly demoting, downgrading, or otherwise suppressing The Truth About COVID-19 in numerous ways that would be hidden from view, but Plaintiffs believe that Amazon is in fact covertly taking such action.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Even if no bookseller in the country had yielded to Warren\u2019s threats, her letter would still be actionable as a clear violation of the First Amendment.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
In Backpage.com, LLC v. Dart, 807 F.3d 229 (7th Cir. 2015) (Posner, J.), relying on Bantam Books, the Court held that a governmental official \u2018violates a plaintiff\u2019s First Amendment rights\u2019 if by \u2018threat\u2019 or \u2018intimidation\u2019 the official attempts to induce \u2018a third party\u2019 to stop \u2018publishing or otherwise disseminating the plaintiff\u2019s message,\u2019 and emphasized that \u2018such a threat is actionable and thus can be enjoined even if it turns out to be empty \u2014 the victim ignores it, and the threatener folds his tent.\u2019<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Such threats go \u2018by the name of \u2018prior restraint,\u2019 and a prior restraint is the quintessential first-amendment violation.\u2019 Accordingly, Plaintiffs ask this Court to vindicate clearly established law, to vindicate Plaintiffs\u2019 constitutional rights, to vindicate the First Amendment itself, by declaring Warren\u2019s conduct unconstitutional and by enjoining her from repeating such conduct in future.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
<\/div>\nWarren Calls Out \u2018Misinformation\u2019 With Misinformation<\/h2>\n
In our complaint, we also emphasize the fact that Warren\u2019s claims of misinformation are themselves misinformation. For example, Warren claims our book falsely \u201casserts that … vitamin D … can prevent COVID-19 infection.\u201d According to Warren, this claim has no scientific basis. This is clearly and verifiably false as there are many studies, published in 2020 and 2021, supporting this claim.<\/p>\n
- Warren specifically singled out my book, \u201cThe Truth About COVID-19,\u201d co-written with Ronnie Cummins, founder and director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), as a prime example of \u201chighly-ranked and favorably-tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures\u201d that she wants banned<\/span><\/li>\n