 I don't think that this necessarily means this issue is over. As I understand it, what the ruling was, and I still think it was a bad ruling based on what I know, but what the ruling was was that the plaintiffs in this case don't have standing. That was a little bit surprising to me since some of them were victims of this censorship. And, of course, you would think a state would have standing on an issue like this. Of course, a state has a vested interest in making sure that the rights of the citizens of that state are protected and upheld and are not infringed upon by a lawless executive branch