Pfizer now claims the right of a corporate sovereign, arguing that states have “no legitimate interest in regulating” the company’s commercial speech while demanding the power to censor Americans’ newsfeeds.

The call for pharmaceutical supremacy came in Pfizer’s response to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s suit alleging that Pfizer committed fraud and “conspired to censor public discourse.” …

At no point, however, does Pfizer respond to Paxton’s detailed allegations that the company’s information was not truthful, but was instead a lucrative marketing campaign designed to “deceive the public.”

The filing does not deny Paxton’s detailed allegations that Pfizer “coerced social media platforms to silence prominent truth-tellers,” including a former FDA Director, and “conspired to censor the vaccine’s critics.”

[These days, I’m loathe to discard #1A allies of any sort, but this is a dumb argument. As I understand Paxton’s suit, it involves misrepresentation that rises to the level of consumer fraud, an interest for both states and the federal government for decades. This is not a #1A case; it’s a fraud case. The First Amendment does not indemnify against civil liabilities arising from commercial fraud. — Ed]