When Jenin Younes saw government censorship machinery ramping up during the pandemic, she knew she had to act. Once an appellate public defender with "leftish" leanings, Younes witnessed firsthand how questioning lockdown policies transformed her from a respected legal professional into someone whose views were suddenly considered dangerous.

Her journey took an unexpected turn when an essay she wrote about the harms of lockdowns on poor communities couldn't find a home in traditional left-wing publications. This led her to connections with prominent scientists including Martin Kulldorff and Jay Bhattacharya, who would later author the controversial Great Barrington Declaration. As social media censorship intensified, Younes found herself drawn into constitutional law's most pressing battle - government influence over online speech.

The evidence Younes and her colleagues uncovered in Missouri v. Biden was stunning. Regular meetings between government officials and social media executives. Direct threats of regulatory consequences. Explicit demands to remove specific posts. "They would pick up the phone and threaten them. 'Why is this post still up?'" she explains. Despite victories in lower courts, the Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the case on technical standing grounds - a pattern Yunus sees repeated throughout constitutional history when the Court faces politically inconvenient facts.

Perhaps most troubling is how quickly free speech principles are abandoned when politically expedient. Younes notes that many of the same people who fought against COVID censorship now advocate for restricting pro-Palestinian speech. As someone with Palestinian heritage, she provides a unique perspective on how fear drives authoritarian impulses across the political spectrum. "The lesson I've learned over the past five years is that maybe the majority of people really have authoritarian tendencies, especially when they're scared," she reflects.

This conversation with hosts Leonard Goodman and Patrick Sullivan offers a masterclass in constitutional principles and a warning about the fragility of free expression. As Younes demonstrates, the First Amendment's protection doesn't depend on the identity or status of the speaker - it's a restriction on government power that benefits everyone. Watch now to understand how censorship tools created for one crisis inevitably find new targets when power changes hands.