This is the Daily Media Update published by the Institute for Free Speech. For press inquiries, please contact [email protected].
|
|
We're Hiring!
.....Institute for Free Speech is hiring a Director of Development responsible for developing and implementing a fundraising plan and managing all development efforts.
IFS seeks a skilled development professional with a proven record of developing relationships with major donors, such as individuals or foundations, our donor network, and other supporters.
This position demands a candidate passionate about free speech and an in-depth understanding of what drives people to support a cause. In short, you will help raise the funds needed to litigate important cases in court and win the fight for the First Amendment’s speech freedoms in the court of public opinion.
This person will report to the president of the Institute for Free Speech and can be executed from Washington, DC or virtually from anywhere in the United States.
You must have strong writing and networking abilities and have the ability to build and maintain trusted, positive, and productive relationships with donors.
|
|
Supreme Court
By Lorie Smith
.....Last Friday, my seven-year journey to secure freedom from government censorship ended in a remarkable victory from the U.S. Supreme Court in 303 Creative v. Elenis. It was a day I’ll never forget. As tears of joy streamed down my face, I thought about how this decision is a victory for all of us.
The Supreme Court said the United States is "a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands." That means, regardless of whether you agree with my beliefs, you are free to speak consistent with the core of who you are.
|
|
By Ken White
.....Put another way, does the First Amendment require that the government prove that a speaker intended that their statement be taken as a threat, or at least that they were reckless or negligent about whether it would by taken that way? Courts have reached different conclusions. As recently as 2015 the Supreme Court has punted rather than resolve the dispute. Now, finally, the Court has resolved the question: the First Amendment requires that, at a minimum, the government prove that a speaker was reckless about whether their statement would be interpreted as threatening.
|
|
The Courts
By Keith E. Whittington
.....A panel of the Fourth Circuit handed down a 2-1 decision today in Porter v. Board of Trustees of North Carolina State University. The opinion can be found here.
Porter is a tenured statistics professor in the college of education. He was unhappy with the direction of the higher ed program, with which he was affiliated. In particular, he thought the college and the program had gone woke and was promoting social justice over good scholarship. He expressed those views internally in departmental email and departmental meetings. As a consequence, he was removed from the higher ed program on the grounds that he was insufficiently collegial.
The majority held that professorial speech in department meetings and the like is speech pursuant to their job duties under Garcetti v. Ceballos and does not fall under a narrow exception for research and teaching. As a consequence, such speech is entirely unprotected by the First Amendment and does not even reach the balancing test under Pickering v. Board of Education.
|
|
By Emma Camp
.....In 2021, police in Blackshear, Georgia, issued a criminal citation against Jeff Gray for holding a sign that read "God Bless the Homeless Vets" outside the town's city hall. The town's police chief even admitted while he was citing Gray that the local law was "kind of silly" but nonetheless ticketed him for failing to obtain Blackshear City Council's permission before holding a "parade, procession, or demonstration."
However, following a lawsuit challenging the local ordinance on First Amendment grounds, the city has now agreed to remove the regulation—and make a donation to a charity for homeless veterans.
"It's a new dawn in Blackshear," FIRE attorney Harrison Rosenthal said in a Thursday press release. "Americans don't need a permission slip to speak in front of city hall. The First Amendment is their permission slip."
|
|
By Noah Rothman
.....Some objections to Doughty’s injunction are likely to get a favorable hearing from courts tasked with reviewing its logic. Civil-liberties attorney Jameel Jaffer warned that the order could be construed as prohibiting government officials from even criticizing social-media companies in public. But most of the legal scholars and First Amendment activists who took issue with the ruling resented the extent to which it confuses governmental notifications relating to objectionable speech with the application of coercive power. That is precisely the issue that deserves to be litigated, as so many of this ruling’s critics inadvertently confessed.
|
|
The States
By Dana Ferguson
.....The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce is suing over a new election law set to take effect next year, alleging it would chill businesses’ free speech if allowed to take effect.
The organization took issue with provisions in a broader election law that bars companies with foreign influenced ownership from making political contributions. And the group filed a lawsuit in federal court last week attempting to block Ramsey County Attorney John Choi and members of the state Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board from enforcing the policy.
Under the law, companies would face legal penalties if they make independent expenditures or contribute to ballot question committees and have foreign ownership thresholds that meet or exceed state limits (1 percent for a single foreign owner or 5 percent for overall foreign national owners).
But that could be difficult to gauge at any given time, the group said. And as a result, most Minnesota corporations could avoid making contributions so they don’t run afoul of the law, they said.
|
|
.....Manhattan District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., today announced the indictments of DWAYNE MONTGOMERY, 64, SHAMSUDDIN RIZA, 70, MILLICENT REDICK, 77, RONALD PEEK, 65, YAHYA MUSHTAQ, 28, SHAHID MUSHTAQ, 29, and ECOSAFETY CONSULTANTS INC. for conspiring to use a straw donor scheme to illegally generate matching funds from the New York City Campaign Finance Board during the 2021 mayoral election.
The defendants are charged in a New York State Supreme Court indictment with Conspiracy in the Fifth Degree, Attempted Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the First Degree, and Attempted Offering A False Instrument for Filing in the First Degree for their roles in this campaign finance scheme.
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
