The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech May 11, 2023 Click here to subscribe to the Daily Media Update. This is the Daily Media Update published by the Institute for Free Speech. For press inquiries, please contact [email protected]. New from the Institute for Free Speech Testimony of Bradley A. Smith before the House Committee on House Administration .....Chairman Steil, Ranking Member Morelle, and members of the Committee on House Administration, on behalf of the Institute for Free Speech, thank you for inviting me to testify at this hearing on the “American Confidence in Elections: Protecting Political Speech.” PDF Video of hearing Supreme Court Election Law Blog: Justice Souter Fought to Avoid Applying “Exacting Scrutiny” to Contribution Limits in McConnell Case By Rick Hasen .....Jimmy Hoover for the National Law Journal, examining the Stevens papers: Among the many insights from Stevens’ papers are the once-private internal court memos in which justices offer suggestions or critiques of each other’s draft opinions in particular cases. The court’s campaign finance ruling in McConnell v. FEC, upholding various aspects of the BCRA, is no exception. IRS Reason: It's Been 10 Years Since the IRS's Tea Party Scandal. Will Congress Finally Act? By Matt Nese .....A bombshell revelation came to light 10 years ago this week in 2013, when the IRS apologized for years of deliberately delaying applications for tax-exempt status from right-of-center organizations. Hundreds of groups were improperly subjected to baseless investigations, invasive and improper demands about their donors, and lengthy delays in processing routine paperwork. The IRS's actions at the time put a severe chill on conservative speech at the height of the Tea Party movement and leading up to the 2012 presidential election. The revelation set off years of investigations and resignations at the IRS. Yet the agency secretly continued its efforts to silence nonprofits disfavored by the agency's bureaucrats and political appointees. In November 2013, the IRS proposed new regulations that were nearly as damaging to the First Amendment as the targeting itself. DHS Foundation for Freedom Online: Political Police? New Docs Show DHS Program To Target “Middle-Aged Pro Life Advocates” and “Budding Conspiracy Theorists” Under Guise Of “Deradicalization” By Mike Benz .....Apparently not content with setting up a Ministry of Truth, an Internet censorship directorate, and even a program for controlling speech in video games, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has devised yet another dystopian program for domestic thought control: pushing citizens to monitor each others’ political beliefs under the guise of “deradicalization.” So reveal new documents obtained by America First Legal (AFL) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The FOIA files show DHS’s Office of Terrorism and Violence Prevention (“OTVTP,” now known as “CP3”) using taxpayer dollars in January 2021 to screenwrite an online “Choose Your Own Adventure”-style video series to “deradicalize” friends and family. DHS’s “radicalization suspects” in the video screenplays are not violent terrorists or extremists. They are typical everyday Americans with typical everyday American opinions. For example, DHS constructs a detailed profile for “Ann,” a “middle-aged pro-life advocate” — she is a “suburban Mom” surrounded by stock footage of “laundry” and “Minivan” who “has become increasingly more concerned about the welfare of other children:” Free Expression Wall Street Journal: DEI Brings Kafka to My Law School By Scott Gerber .....Franz Kafka’s “The Trial” tells the story of Josef K., a man arrested, prosecuted and killed by an inaccessible authority, with the nature of his crime revealed neither to him nor to the reader. I’m Josef K. The Media Fox News: Biden White House says it can expel reporters who don't act professionally, raising First Amendment concerns By Brian Flood and David Rutz .....The Biden White House wants to revise rules for who can attend press briefings and news conferences, irking an outspoken reporter who believes the "threat against the First Amendment" will be used to shield President Biden and members of his administration from difficult questions. The White House informed reporters in a notice Friday that credentials, known as hard passes, will be revoked under the new rules if a journalist doesn’t act "in a professional manner," with written warnings for violators followed by suspensions and bans for repeat offenders. National Review: National Review, Other Conservative Outlets Branded as ‘Disinformation’ and Blacklisted By Judson Berger .....Yet more evidence has surfaced that the “disinformation” panic is undermining a free and open press — or at least is being exploited to enforce ideological uniformity. Gabe Kaminsky with the Washington Examiner, who has been assiduously tracking the efforts by “Disinformation Inc.” to blacklist conservative news, says he’s obtained leaked data from an ad-industry whistleblower on how a media-investment company “blacklisted conservative media outlets and labeled them as ‘disinformation’ or ‘hate speech’ before the 2020 presidential election.” ... Such sweeping judgments about not an individual claim or article but of media outlets’ entire work product are of course absurd. But the effects of these lists could be corrosive, democratically speaking, considering they’re essentially an effort to demonetize non-mainstream media...The outfit here, GroupM, comprises an array of agencies, with well-heeled clients ranging from Google to Coke to Uber. Its website says it is “responsible for more than $60 billion in annual media investment” and is “shaping the next era of media.” The States Election Law Blog: Emerging Fight Over Party Control of Nominees By Tabatha Abu El-Haj .....The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Greg Bluestein reports this morning on efforts by the Georgia Republican Assembly, a conservative faction within the state GOP, to change the party’s rules to permit the state party to block candidates from qualifying to run as Republicans “if they’re deemed to be insufficiently conservative or a ‘traitor’ to the party.” The article is a caution for those who have been arguing that returning control of party nominations to the party and its leaders would moderate our politics as compared to the primary system. It all depends on who those party leaders are, doesn’t it? Arizona Republic: After criticism on inauguration funds, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs OKs limits on future governors By Stacey Barchenger .....After widespread criticism over an initial lack of transparency around who paid for her inauguration, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs has signed a bill that will shed more light on future festivities and cap the amount future governors can raise. Hobbs signed Senate Bill 1299, which was introduced by Republican lawmakers in protest over the governor's inauguration but won almost unanimous support among GOP and Democratic lawmakers. Only one Republican voted against the bill as it moved through the legislative process. With Hobbs' signature on the bill Tuesday, future donations to inauguration events are capped at $25,000 each per business or individual, and governors who raise the money must put it into a state fund. Requiring the use of a state bank account makes records available to the public and limits how a governor can spend leftover money. That's because of an existing state law that says such funds are "for the purpose of promoting the interests of the state or to promote and encourage citizen public service to the state." City & State PA: Lawmakers advance legislation banning pre-checked campaign contribution boxes By Justin Sweitzer .....The Pennsylvania Senate State Government Committee advanced legislation Tuesday that would prohibit political candidates from using pre-checked boxes on campaign sites to sign up contributors for recurring donations. The practice, which has been used by candidates running for state and federal office in Pennsylvania, is legal, but it can cause people to unknowingly sign up to make recurring political donations, critics say. State Sen. Amanda Cappelletti, who is the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 383, said the lack of a ban on pre-checked boxes creates an opportunity for “deceptive and unethical” fundraising practices. FIRE: Uncompelling verdict: After 18-year legal battle, former student loses fight against college officials who tried to compel his speech By Talia Barnes .....Here at FIRE, we often come across speech-related policies and practices with disturbing implications. But perhaps one of the most unsettling practices is compelling speech — that is, attempting to force an individual to voice particular statements or sentiments even if he doesn’t endorse them. This scenario is not relegated to dystopian novels. According to former Rhode Island College graduate student William Felkner, it happened to him in 2004 when an instructor gave him a failing grade after he refused to publicly express beliefs he didn’t hold. Unfortunately, his nearly two-decades-long legal battle, supported by FIRE, ended in defeat on April 20, when the Rhode Island Supreme Court granted qualified immunity to the college officials who Felkner alleged penalized him for refusing to toe an ideological line. 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 ‌ ‌ ‌ The Institute for Free Speech | 1150 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 801, Washington, DC 20036 Unsubscribe [email protected] Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by [email protected]