The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech September 20, 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 Report on Inflation Adjustments to State Contribution Limits By Alec Greven .....In April 2023, New Jersey became the latest state to index its candidate contribution limits to inflation. This means that 20 of the 38 states that place contribution limits on individuals now provide some mechanism to increase those limits. Of those 20 states, 17 sensibly index their contribution limits to inflation, but three have adjustments that do not keep pace with inflation. Including the 12 states with no limits on individual contributions, the right to make campaign contributions is not eroded by inflation in 29 of the 50 states. PDF FEC Written Testimony of Sean J. Cooksey Vice Chairman, Federal Election Commission Before United States Committee on House Administration “Oversight of the Federal Election Commission” .....The Federal Election Commission is the only agency that “has as its sole purpose the regulation of core constitutionally protected activity”—political speech. Our job is to administer and enforce the campaign-finance laws that Congress has passed, consistent with our obligations under the First Amendment, to ensure the integrity and transparency of political campaigns for federal office. It is important and sensitive work that carries significant consequences for our democratic system of government. It was for that reason Congress wisely chose to give the Federal Election Commission its bipartisan structure. By statute, the Commission is designed to have six Commissioners, with no more than three from any one political party. Any major action the Commission takes—whether pursuing enforcement or issuing an advisory opinion—requires four affirmative votes, meaning that everything of substance that the Commission does must have bipartisan backing. And for almost fifty years, the Commission has done its work to administer and enforce our nation’s campaign finance laws. Ed. note: Watch the live hearing here. The Courts Wall Street Journal: Hunter Biden Sues IRS for Alleged Breach of His Privacy By C. Ryan Barber .....President Biden’s son Hunter Biden sued the Internal Revenue Service on Monday, alleging that his privacy rights were violated when agents aired concerns to Congress and the media about the handling of the investigation into his taxes and business dealings. In a 27-page lawsuit, Hunter Biden’s lawyers centered on a pair of IRS agents, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, who have said Justice Department officials slow-walked and stymied the investigation into the president’s son. The younger Biden’s lawyers argued that, in airing concerns about the handling of the criminal inquiry, the two agents disclosed information that federal law deems should be kept secret. Noting that Hunter Biden is the president’s son, the lawyers wrote: “Mr. Biden has no fewer or lesser rights than any other American citizen, and no government agency or government agent has free reign [sic] to violate his rights simply because of who he is.” ... In the lawsuit Monday, filed in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, Hunter Biden’s legal team said the IRS agents and their attorneys had “willfully disregarded federal tax law, undermining Americans’ faith in the IRS and the purported confidentiality of its investigations.” CNBC: FTX accuses Sam Bankman-Fried’s mother of being key advisor to son on political contributions By Brian Schwartz .....The mother of former cryptocurrency king Sam Bankman-Fried is being accused in a new lawsuit of acting as a key advisor to her son and his allies for political campaign contributions that later led to criminal charges against him and others. The complaint, filed on Monday by the now-bankrupt crypto exchange FTX, accuses Barbara Fried of being a “point person” for her son Bankman-Fried’s “political contribution strategy.” It says that Fried, out of concern about the optics of her son helping finance causes she supported, encouraged Bankman-Friend and those close to him to “to avoid (if not violate) federal campaign finance disclosure rules by engaging in straw donations or otherwise concealing the FTX Group as the source of the contributions.” Washington Examiner: Sam Bankman-Fried's father advised top liberal dark money network Arabella Advisors: Lawsuit By Gabe Kaminsky .....The father of disgraced cryptocurrency kingpin Sam Bankman-Fried apparently "sat on the advisory board" of the largest left-wing dark money network in the United States, according to a new lawsuit. Bankman-Fried's father, Stanford Law School professor Joseph Bankman, was accused alongside his wife, Stanford Law School professor Barbara Fried, in a Monday complaint by their son's bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange, FTX, of unlawfully siphoning off millions of dollars in firm funds to benefit their "pet causes" and themselves. Bankman, whom FTX says helped the company "navigate tax issues," said at one point he "considered having funds made available by Sam through Arabella," according to court documents. The Media Riverfront Times: Judge Orders Post-Dispatch Not to Publish Info About Accused Cop Killer By Ryan Krull .....A St. Louis judge Friday issued a ruling barring the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from publishing any information from a mental health evaluation of an accused cop killer until his trial has concluded. The controversy around the mental health report has been before Circuit Court Judge Elizabeth Hogan for four months now — and stands as a rare case of prior restraint barring the daily newspaper from publishing. Free Expression Wall Street Journal: ‘Floyd Abrams: Speaking Freely’ Review: The First Amendment’s Dogged Defender By John Anderson .....The most famous and perhaps original “First Amendment lawyer,” Mr. Abrams defended the publication of the Pentagon Papers and a reporter’s right to protect sources in her Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas coverage. But he also made the argument that won the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court, which declared political contributions to be political speech—and thus protected by the First Amendment. Currently, he is defending Clearview AI’s facial-recognition technology. As demonstrated by “Floyd Abrams: Speaking Freely,” pigeonholing Mr. Abrams is no easy task. Either the left or the right might declare him the enemy, depending on the case. He would plead consistency. Political Parties New York Times: ‘A Perfect Storm for the Ambitious, Extreme Ideologue’ By Thomas B. Edsall .....Economic conditions are improving at a much faster rate in the United States than they are in Europe, but partisan polarization is worsening here at a more intense pace than elsewhere. What gives? While no issue divides America today as slavery did in the 1850s, or as the struggle between agricultural and industrial interests did at the turn of the last century, voters are now split into warring camps at remarkable levels of hostility. Is there something unique to the United States that exacerbates partisan animosity, even in good times, perhaps especially in good times? Is this yet another dark side to American exceptionalism? A forthcoming paper by Pippa Norris, a political scientist at Harvard’s Kennedy School, “Fractionalized and Polarized Party Systems in Western Democracies,” and a paper from 2021, “Cross-Country Trends in Affective Polarization,” by the economists Levi Boxell and Matthew Gentzkow, of Stanford, and Jesse M. Shapiro of Harvard, forcefully raise the question: What’s going on in this country? The States Minnesota Reformer: Republicans say Orwellian ‘bias registry’ could still be created under new law By Deena Winter .....A Minnesota bill that would have created a state government database of “hate incidents” — which drew impassioned opposition from Republicans who said it would police constitutionally protected political speech — was quietly watered down during the waning days of the legislative session. The state Department of Human Rights will not compile a database of hate speech, which is what drew fierce debate and national attention from conservative media. But Republicans aren’t ready to accept victory, pointing to the funding that was left intact. They say that could allow unelected bureaucrats to decide what’s bias, and to compile a database of provocative speech that could be used as a weapon against political opponents. 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 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]