A federal judge has ruled that the discovery in a lawsuit filed by video platform Rumble against leftist pro-censorship advocates Nandini Jammi and Claire Atkin, co-founders of Check My Ads, will proceed, denying the defendants’ request to stop or delay the discovery phase of the lawsuit.
The defendants’ request for a stay of discovery has been rejected, meaning that discovery in the lawsuit will now commence — a big win for Rumble in its free speech case against Check My Ads, as discovery will result in the lawsuit moving forward.
“Courts have broad discretion in managing their own dockets, including the power to stay proceedings — but ‘a stay of discovery pending the resolution of a motion to dismiss is the exception, rather than the rule,'” the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida explained in its court ruling denying the defendants’ motion for a stay in discovery.
“Having taken a ‘preliminary peek’ at the Motion to Dismiss, the Court does not find it to be clearly meritorious and case dispositive,” the federal court added, citing McCabe v. Foley, adding that finding a “request to stay discovery pending a resolution of a motion is rarely appropriate unless resolution of the motion will dispose of the entire case.”
“Furthermore, because it is unclear whether any purported pleading defects might be cured by amendment, the Court cannot say that the Motion to Dismiss is truly case-dispositive,” the court added, noting that motions to stay discovery are “rarely granted” except in “unusual circumstances.”
The ruling was signed by Senior Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
In November, Rumble filed a lawsuit against Jammi and Atkin, two co-founders of purported watchdog organization, Check My Ads, a far-left pro-censorship pressure group that smears conservatives with false allegations of “hate speech” and “disinformation” in an attempt to scare advertisers and tech platforms into cutting ties with them.
The lawsuit accuses Jammi and Atkin of being unable to tolerate Rumble’s content-neutral philosophy and seeking to silence “competing points of view.”
“Defendants have repeatedly peddled the false narrative that Rumble is primarily monetized by and wholly dependent upon revenue from Google Ads, when in reality, Google Ads now represents less than 1% of the Company’s revenue,” the lawsuit states. “This narrative is particularly damaging to Rumble.”
“The notion that Rumble is heavily dependent on ad revenue from Google is wholly inconsistent with Rumble’s publicly stated mission to be free from the political and economic pressures of Big Tech,” the suit adds. “It is equally damaging to Rumble because it falsely attributes a material and existential financial risk to the Company that Defendants’ stated mission to eliminate Rumble’s Google Ad revenue will cause Rumble’s financial collapse.”
In a November press release, Rumble pointed out that “Jammi has a track record of launching pressure campaigns against advertisers on other outlets, including Fox News and Breitbart, and has worked with Media Matters, the hyper-partisan organization that also attempts to hound advertisers to stop spending on outlets that support the free exchange of ideas.”
Jammi was the co-founder of leftist pressure group Sleeping Giants, which targeted Breitbart News in the past. She later left the organization, claiming it discriminated against her as a “woman of color.”
“The irony is that the defendants piously claim to be in the business of protecting all of us from disinformation, but they are the ones lying to the public,” Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski said.
Pavlovski also noted that Rumble’s lawsuit “opens up another front in the ongoing war against censorship, much like X’s recently filed suit against Media Matters — another entity that tries to shut down dissent online — and Truth Social’s lawsuit against 20 media outlets.”
“For those of us who value free expression and the free exchange of ideas, it is important to stand up to bullies — and people who lie and use intimidation tactics are most assuredly bullies, just as they are enemies of free speech,” the Rumble CEO said.
“When anti-free speech zealots, whose self-declared mission is to shut Rumble down, lie to inflict intentional economic harm on our company, we have no choice but to hold them accountable,” Pavlovski added. “Defamation is not free speech. We have filed this lawsuit because we have a responsibility to our shareholders, creators, users, and advertisers to act, and not sit idly by, when someone attacks our company’s reputation solely to silence differing political views. Our mission requires it.”
Rumble is seeking actual, presumed, and punitive damages, in addition to all costs and fees associated with the case.
The case is Rumble Inc. v. Jammi, No. 8:23-cv-02718 in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Alana Mastrangelo is a reporter for Breitbart News. You can follow her on Facebook and X at @ARmastrangelo, and on Instagram.
