I also think government bureaucrats saw how much they were able to push citizens during the pandemic, and force them to do things they vocally did not want to do, and so now they feel emboldened.
This seems like a fatalistic take. Surely, for the government and legislative body, removing government censorship is easier than enforcing it?
That was 3 years ago I believe. The logging never stopped and continues to this day. The courts are a lie. Democracy is a lie. Pushing back doesn't matter. The only solution is some sort of technology similar to encryption, Tor, freenet etc.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_t...
The utterance of "fire!" in and of itself is not generally thought to be illegal within the United States> Ultimately, whether it is legal in the United States to falsely shout "fire" in a theater depends on the circumstances in which it is done and the consequences of doing it.
Edit: I am not agreeing with the parent that there is value in the comparison, only that the premise of the example is valid - i.e. that speech can have consequences dire enough to make it worth controlling that speech in certain contexts.
That about sums it up. Censorship is another way of saying control of information.
"Disinformation" is not an acceptable answer because it's about as tangible as quicksand.