We asked. Purple Mattress Sued. Here’s an update on the lawsuit.
Boca Raton, FL – Honest Mattress Reviews prevailed in an important First Amendment matter, fending off censorship in a Utah federal court on Tuesday. In the case, the famous Purple Mattress company secured an early temporary restraining order, censoring the Honest Mattress Reviews website from publishing a series of articles making an investigative inquiry into the content of a powder used in their mattresses.
VIDEO NOTE: We’ve been reassured that Purple does NOT use Talcum Powder.
“We asked them what it was,” said Ryan Monahan, Honest Reviews’ CEO. “They wouldn’t tell us, which made us suspicious. We kept asking, so they sued us.”
After suing, Purple Mattress went to court, without Honest Reviews even present in Court and convinced the judge to give an order that required Honest Reviews to censor their articles, and even stop rating the Purple Mattress as “poor.” – “A rating it got because of their refusal to tell us what the powder was,” said Monahan.
Monahan wondered if the powder could be dangerous to consumers. “I wasn’t sure,” said Monahan. “But, as a consumer journalist, I wanted potential buyers to know what they were getting.”
The Purple Mattress company filed hundreds of pages of documents in an aggressive attempt to censor Honest Reviews.
In response to the injunction, the Honest Reviews website whimsically changed the rating from “poor” to an emoji that represented a “”. For this, writing about the lawsuit, and putting content on a GoFundMe page, Purple Mattress sought contempt of court against Honest Reviews.
To fight the contempt and dissolve the restraining order, Honest Reviews brought in First Amendment attorney, Marc Randazza. Since truth is a defense to defamation, Randazza retained an expert witness from Harvard University. In a preliminary report, the expert concluded that the powder could be an irritant, and consumers should be informed about the existence of the powder.
After Randazza’s arguments and briefing, the court threw our the earlier restraining order – restoring Honest Reviews’ First Amendment rights.
“This is a very important win to preserve the First Amendment,” said Marc Randazza, lead counsel for Honest Mattress Reviews. “I think we are fortunate that we had a judge that has such reverence for the Constitution and who understood quickly that the First Amendment will not abide prior restraints on speech.”
A prior restraint is one of the most offensive actions that can be taken against First Amendment rights. Ever since the landmark case of Near v. Minnesota in 1931, it has been clear Supreme Court jurisprudence that prior restraints, when granted, can only be done so if the party seeking it overcomes a monumental burden. Even the disclosure of government documents during wartime has not been held sufficient to warrant a prior restraint. Accordingly, when a mattress company simply doesn’t want investigative journalism, that could never pass the necessary legal test.
Attached are a number of documents from the case which highlight the most important legal principles in the case.
If this Powder is completely brand new to you here are some reference articles
DISCLAIMER: Anyone reading my reviews of Purple Mattress company should be advised that they sued Honest Reviews and its CEO Ryan Monahan for our previous journalism about this company. Those reviews were unbiased, and we contend that our journalism about them today is unbiased. Nevertheless, reasonable people might question our objectivity given that we are the subject of a SLAPP suit filed by Purple Mattress. We are being defended by First Amendment Lawyer, Marc J. Randazza, to whom all inquires about the litigation should be directed.