This is the Daily Media Update published by the Institute for Free Speech. For press inquiries, please contact [email protected].  

.....On Monday March 27, 2023, the Supreme Court heard the case United v. Hansen. The issue in the case is how broadly the government can limit expression that “encourages” or “induces” people to engage in illegal conduct. The Court has a chance to protect a wide range of speech by striking down or clarifying an unclear law that chills speech on a vast range of policy issues.

The case revolves around the activities of Helaman Hansen, who profited off of giving illegal immigrants false advice about staying in the United States illegally. While Hansen did many terrible things, one of the charges the government brought was for violating statute 8 U.S.C. 1324 by “inducing” or “encouraging” someone to violate U.S. immigration laws.

This statute, on its face, appears to criminalize a massive amount of speech protected by the First Amendment. For example, it is unclear whether posting on YouTube a video one knows will be seen by illegal immigrants saying that America is a wonderful and everyone should stay here would violate the law.

Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): Chevron Matters — But Not as Much as You Might Think

.....Today the Supreme Court decided to hear Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimando, a case that raises the prospect that the Court might overrule  Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which requires federal judges to defer to administrative agencies' interpretations of federal laws, so long as Congress has not addressed the issue in question, and the agency's view is "reasonable." Some legal commentators are, depending on their ideology, excited or appalled by the prospect that Chevron might be overruled. Advocates of reversal hope and critics fear that the result would be severe constraints on the power of federal regulatory agencies, and perhaps the administrative state generally.

While I would be happy to see Chevron overturned, I am skeptical of claims it will make a huge difference to the future of federal regulation. I explained why in two previous posts, (see here and here). To briefly summarize, my reasons for skepticism are…

Wall Street Journal: Justice Samuel Alito: ‘This Made Us Targets of Assassination’

By James Taranto

.....A federal law called Section 1507 makes it a crime to picket or parade “in or near” a federal judge’s residence “with the intent of influencing” him “in the discharge of his duty.” During a hearing last month, Attorney General Merrick Garland told Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah) that the marshals have “full authority to arrest” violators of Section 1507. But according to training slides obtained by Sen. Katie Britt (R., Ala.), deputies on the justices’ residential details are told to enforce the law only as “a last resort to prevent physical harm to the Justices and/or their families.”

Washington Post: How DeSantis accidentally handed Disney a potent weapon against him

By Greg Sargent

.....When the Walt Disney Co. went looking for evidence to feature in its new lawsuit against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, its lawyers found much of what they needed in DeSantis’s own recently published memoir.

Buried in Disney’s complaint against DeSantis is something surprising. Numerous quotes taken from “The Courage to be Free” appear to support the company’s central allegation: that the Republican governor improperly wielded state power to punish Disney’s speech criticizing his policies, violating the First Amendment.

EFF: Appeals Court Should Reconsider Letting The FBI Block Twitter’s Surveillance Transparency Report

.....Today, EFF and ACLU filed a brief in support of Twitter’s effort to get an appeals court to reconsider its dangerous opinion enforcing a government gag order on Twitter’s 2013 transparency report.

In this long-running and important case, Twitter tried to publish a report bringing much-needed transparency to the government’s use of FISA orders and national security letters, including specifying whether it had received any of these types of requests. However, without going to a court, the FBI told Twitter it could not publish the report as written. Twitter sued, and last month the federal Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit upheld the FBI’s gag order.

Daily Beast: The First Amendment Is the Greatest Defense for the Powerless and Marginalized

By Jacob Mchangama and Nadine Strossen

.....The idea that the First Amendment has been “weaponized” by the powerful has gained increasing traction in the digital age, when social media can supercharge political tribalism and amplify extreme voices. “Free Speech Is Killing Us” read the headline of a 2019 New York Times op-ed by New Yorker reporter Andrew Marantz, and similar arguments have been published frequently in elite mainstream outlets, including The New York Times Magazine and the Los Angeles Times.

Daily Caller: Middle School Student Claims He Was Sent Home After Wearing ‘There Are Only Two Genders’ Shirt

.....A seventh grader in Massachusetts claimed he was removed from his gym class March 21 after he wore a t-shirt that said “There are only two genders.”

The 12-year-old’s comments were posted by the Twitter account Libs of TikTok. The student, Liam Morrison, spoke about the incident during an April 13 school board meeting for Middleborough Public Schools.

FIRE: First Amendment News 377

.....Continuing his impressive journey as a First Amendment lawyer at Hogan and Hartson and then at Davis Wright Tremaine, Robert Corn-Revere recently joined his colleague Ronnie London as chief counsel for FIRE. 

“The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is thrilled to announce that leading First Amendment litigator and author Robert Corn-Revere has joined the organization’s litigation department as chief counsel.”

New York Times: ‘The Godfather of A.I.’ Leaves Google and Warns of Danger Ahead

By Cade Metz

.....Geoffrey Hinton was an artificial intelligence pioneer. In 2012, Dr. Hinton and two of his graduate students at the University of Toronto created technology that became the intellectual foundation for the A.I. systems that the tech industry’s biggest companies believe is a key to their future.

Carolina Journal: Bill would prohibit compelled speech when hiring state employees

.....The North Carolina Senate is advancing a bill that would prohibit applicants for state employee positions to affirm their support for the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) agenda.

Senate Bill 364, Nondiscrimination & Dignity in State Work, passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 26. The measure ensures that prospective state employees are not required to “endorse or opine on” any belief as a condition of employment.

Axios: Montana's first transgender lawmaker files lawsuit against state over censure

By Ivana Saric

.....Montana state Rep. Zooey Zephyr (D), the state's only transgender lawmaker, filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging the GOP-led House's decision last week to censure her…

Read an article you think we would be interested in? Send it to Tiffany Donnelly at [email protected]. For email filters, the subject of this email will always begin with "Institute for Free Speech Media Update."  

The Institute for Free Speech is a nonpartisan, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that promotes and defends the First Amendment rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government. Please support the Institute's mission by clicking here. For further information, visit www.ifs.org.