June 26, 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].

In the News

Fox News: CA school district admin sued after saying he wants to bring conservative staff 'to the slaughterhouse'

By Hannah Grossman

.....A California district administrator, who said he wanted to bring voices opposing diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives "to the slaughterhouse," was sued by a faculty member – along with the entire district – for allegedly violating his First Amendment rights.

The Institute for Free Speech filed a lawsuit against district administrators on behalf of Bakersfield College professor Daymon Johnson, who said he was being targeted for investigation after being outspoken about his political beliefs, the College Fix reported Wednesday.

The Bakersfield College is a public institution operated by the Kern Community College District.

Richmond Times-Dispatch: When restricting free speech backfires

By Tom Garrett

.....It took over two years, but YouTube has finally learned a crucial lesson about the dangers of restricting political speech.

This month, the online video giant announced important changes to its policy of removing videos that include election-related “misinformation.”

YouTube began the policy in an effort to stop particular categories of misinformation that the company claims cause real-world harm, including assertions that previous elections hadn’t been fairly decided. The site removed thousands of videos under these rules, many of which allegedly included unsubstantiated claims about the 2020 presidential election.

The rules ban “content advancing false claims that widespread fraud, errors, or glitches occurred in certain past elections to determine heads of government. Or, content that claims that the certified results of those elections were false.” The policy revisions adopted in early June mean that these rules no longer apply to content related to the 2020 U.S. election and earlier American elections.

To be clear, I do not support election denialism or attempts to mislead the public with knowingly false claims. However, I’m also deeply concerned about the fact that policies limiting political speech inevitably punish innocent speakers and damage online discourse.

Supreme Court

New York Times: Supreme Court Rejects Free Speech Challenge to Immigration Law

By Adam Liptak

.....The Supreme Court avoided a difficult First Amendment question on Friday, ruling that an unusual 1986 federal law that makes it a crime to “encourage” or “induce” unauthorized immigrants to come to or stay in the United States should be read narrowly to require complicity in a criminal conduct.

A broader interpretation of the law would give rise to constitutional concerns, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority in the 7-to-2 decision. She added that the law’s key words were terms of art used in a “specialized, criminal-law sense” and mean something different than they do in ordinary usage. For purposes of the law, she wrote, the terms require proof of solicitation or facilitation of a crime.

When the case was argued in March, several justices asked questions about the law’s sweep, given the usual meaning of “encourage.”

The Courts

New York Times: Judge Rules Against Florida Law Restricting Drag Shows

By Patricia Mazzei

.....A federal judge in Florida temporarily blocked a new law allowing the state to penalize businesses that admit children to “adult live performances” such as drag shows..,

Judge Presnell’s ruling in favor of Hamburger Mary’s on Friday found that existing obscenity laws already gave the state the authority necessary to protect children. In the 24-page ruling, he also found that the state failed to narrowly tailor the law, and that its broad attempt to regulate content would very likely violate the First Amendment’s free speech protections.

*Some Assembly Required: The Rights and Responsibilities of Protest Leaders

By John Inazu

.....Last week, a panel of judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decided Doe v. Mckesson, a case that commentators and legal scholars have been tracking carefully. The facts involve a Black Lives Matter protest in front of the Baton Rouge police department. The protest was led by DeRay Mckesson, a movement leader for Black Lives Matter. Mckesson eventually led the protesters onto a local interstate to block traffic. At this point, Baton Rouge police began making arrests, and during this confrontation an unidentified protester struck and severely injured an officer.

Congress

CNN: First on CNN: Senators press Google, Meta and Twitter on whether their layoffs could imperil 2024 election

By Brian Fung

.....Three US senators are pressing Facebook-parent Meta, Google-parent Alphabet and Twitter about whether their layoffs may have hindered the companies’ ability to fight the spread of misinformation ahead of the 2024 elections.

In a letter to the companies dated Tuesday, the lawmakers warned that reported staff cuts to content moderation and other teams could make it harder for the companies to fulfill their commitments to election integrity.

“This is particularly troubling given the emerging use of artificial intelligence to mislead voters,” wrote Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Vermont Democratic Sen. Peter Welch and Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, according to a copy of the letter reviewed by CNN.

Online Speech Platforms

Washington Post: Meta says it will block news from Facebook, Instagram in Canada

By Amanda Coletta and Gerrit De Vynck

.....Meta said Thursday that it plans to follow through with a threat to block Canadians from sharing news on its platforms, after the federal government passed a law requiring digital firms to pay domestic media organizations for their content.

Candidates and Campaigns

New York Times: A.I.’s Use in Elections Sets Off a Scramble for Guardrails

By Tiffany Hsu and Steven Lee Myers

.....What began a few months ago as a slow drip of fund-raising emails and promotional images composed by A.I. for political campaigns has turned into a steady stream of campaign materials created by the technology, rewriting the political playbook for democratic elections around the world.

Increasingly, political consultants, election researchers and lawmakers say setting up new guardrails, such as legislation reining in synthetically generated ads, should be an urgent priority. Existing defenses, such as social media rules and services that claim to detect A.I. content, have failed to do much to slow the tide.

As the 2024 U.S. presidential race starts to heat up, some of the campaigns are already testing the technology.

Politico: No Labels declines to reveal just who is funding its third party bid

By Heidi Przybyla and Shia Kapos

.....No Labels’ bid to run a third party presidential candidate in 2024 has sparked a number of questions about political motivations. Chief among them: Who, exactly, is paying for this thing?

The centrist group consists of a constellation of entities, some of which disclose donor names. But the main one is a nonprofit which, unlike political parties, does not have to reveal the names of its funders...

Ryan Clancy, the group’s chief strategist, said the group doesn’t discuss individual donors as a matter of protecting their privacy and safety.

“We know how the game is played these days, which is (if) people don’t like your organization, what’s the easiest way to destroy it? Well, go find the donor list and go start intimidating them in their place of work and harassing them on social media,” said Clancy.

The States

AZCentral.: Kari Lake continues to defame me. Here's why I'm suing her for it

By Stephen Richer

.....For the last seven months, a high-profile former statewide candidate for office — from my own political party — has spread falsehoods about our elections and about me specifically.

Rather than accept political defeat, rather than get a new job, she has sought to undermine confidence in our elections and has mobilized millions of her followers against me.

Her defamatory allegations have unleashed violent vitriol and other dire consequences.

She has gone far outside of the bounds of protected free speech as guaranteed under the First Amendment and the Arizona Constitution.

That’s why I’m suing Kari Lake, her campaign and her political action committee for engaging in a concerted campaign to defame, threaten and isolate me.

The defamation lawsuit was filed on June 22 in Maricopa County Superior Court.

Michigan Review: Michigan HB 4474 is Anti–Free Speech and Anti-Constitution

By Wade Vellky

.....Michigan HB 4474 states that a person may be charged with a felony and sentenced to up to five years in prison if they “intimidate[] or harass[] another individual,” use “force or violence, or cause “severe mental anguish” based on two new additions of “perceived characteristics”: gender identity or sexual orientation. How can we define intimidation, harassment, and violence? Well, if the person feels like they’ve been intimidated or harassed, then, of course, they’ve been harassed according to this bill. It’s also important to mention that no one on the left can even define what violence means. Up until a couple of years ago, effectively everyone understood that violence was related to some form of physical harm. Unfortunately, a wide majority of Democrats no longer define violence that way. So, how do we define violence? According to Democrats, words are violence, and in particular, words that they disagree with are, obviously, violence.

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 political rights to free speech, press, assembly, and petition guaranteed by the First Amendment. Please support the Institute's mission by clicking here. For further information, visit www.ifs.org.

Follow the Institute for Free Speech