This is the Daily Media Update published by the Institute for Free Speech. For press inquiries, please contact [email protected].  
Congress
 
.....On Thursday, May 11, 2023, at 9:30 a.m. ET, the Committee on House Administration will hold a full committee hearing titled, “American Confidence in Elections: Protecting Political Speech.” The hearing will take place in room 1310 of the Longworth House Office Building.
Witnesses:
  • Mr. Bradley Smith, Chairman and Founder, Institute for Free Speech
  • Witness Statement [PDF 301KB]
  • Ms. Audrey Martin, Partner, The Gober Group
  • Mr. Justin Riemer, Principal, Riemer Law, LLC
  • Witness Statement [PDF 191KB]
  • Mr. Stephen Spaulding, Vice President for Policy & External Affairs, Common Cause
  • Witness Statement [PDF 237KB]
  • Ms. Harmeet Dhillon, Managing Partner, Dhillon Law Group Inc.
Livestream here.
Supreme Court
 
SCOTUSblogPetitions of the Week
By Kalvis Golde
22-842
Issue: Whether the First Amendment allows a government regulator to threaten regulated entities with adverse regulatory actions if they do business with a controversial speaker, as a consequence of (a) the government’s own hostility to the speaker’s viewpoint or (b) a perceived “general backlash” against the speaker’s advocacy.
The Courts
 
By Nicholas Fandos and Rebecca Davis O’Brien
.....Federal prosecutors have charged Representative George Santos of New York with 13 counts of money laundering, stealing public money, wire fraud and making false statements to Congress.
Prosecutors said the charges resulted from “fraudulent schemes and brazen misrepresentations” designed to enrich Mr. Santos, mislead donors and win a seat in Congress as a Republican from Queens.
Here is an overview of the charges contained in the indictment, which was unsealed on Wednesday.
.....The American Civil Liberties Union is seeking an injunction against North Carolina’s new anti-riot law. ACLU is also asking a federal judge to rule that every local district attorney will be treated as a defendant in the case.
The group filed paperwork in U.S. District Court Monday asking for a preliminary injunction against the law approved earlier this year. In separate documents, ACLU is asking for certification of all N.C. district attorneys as a “defendant class” in the case.
These latest requests follow the group’s April 10 lawsuit challenging the law, which is set to take effect Dec. 1. The anti-riot law was filed as House Bill 40.
Free Expression

By Richard Stengel
.....AI itself is not human and cannot have constitutional rights, writes Cass Sunstein, just as a vacuum cleaner does not have constitutional rights. But it seems pretty clear that content created by generative AI probably has free speech protections. It is speech. It is speech that is created out of the raw material of human speech. It is created from code made by humans. It certainly contributes to the marketplace of ideas—it may well contribute too much. The modern Court has shown over and over that government cannot restrict speech because of its message, its subject matter, or its content. [See “Police Department v. Mosley”] At the same time, it makes sense that government can restrict any AI speech that is traditionally not protected by the First Amendment: libel, criminal solicitation, false advertising, child pornography, and speech that leads to imminent lawless action. Such speech is unconstitutional, whether it is created by a human, an algorithm, or a toaster. The question is whether government can regulate AI to prevent unconstitutional speech.
The States
 
By Trisha Ahmed
.....North Dakota Republican Gov. Doug Burgum has signed a bill that prohibits public schools and government entities from requiring teachers and employees to refer to transgender people by the pronouns they use, the governor’s office announced Monday...
It is effective immediately.
Burgum said in a statement that the new law “largely codifies existing practices while reaffirming the First Amendment right to free speech ... balancing the rights and interests of students, parents and teachers.”
By Andrew Grub
.....In a recent Florida appellate court decision — William B. Crosby, III v. Town of Indian River Shores — the majority ruled that Florida’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) laws do not apply to governmental entities…
The majority in the Indian River Shores case relied on legislative intent and policy considerations to conclude that the anti-SLAPP statute should not protect governmental entities. They explained that the purpose of the statute is to protect individuals and organizations from retaliatory lawsuits aimed at stifling free speech. I believe this is a good policy argument, but the text of the statute does not support such a conclusion.
By Maya Shimizu Harris
.....The Wyoming Republican Party was united in condemning Laramie Democrat Rep. Karlee Provenza for posting a meme concerning transgender people that was criticized for its violent overtones.
But Republican leaders were split on Saturday over whether or not the party should urge disciplinary action against Provenza for posting the meme, with some passionately arguing that doing so could create a precedent for the infringement on free speech — a right that is strongly emphasized in the party.
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 
Follow the Institute for Free Speech