The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech November 21, 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 Center Square (California): California DEIA mandate faces injunction in federal judge's pretrial report By Kenneth Schrupp .....A federal magistrate issued a report and recommendation to a district court judge, calling for a preliminary injunction against the California community college system’s diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility mandate for hiring, training and evaluating professors. The Courts Wall Street Journal: Trump’s Gag Order Should Stand, Appeals Panel Signals By C. Ryan Barber and Sadie Gurman .....A federal appeals court signaled Monday that it would affirm but potentially narrow a gag order imposed on former President Donald Trump in the criminal case alleging he conspired to overturn his 2020 election loss. During a more than two-hour hearing in Washington, a three-judge panel expressed skepticism toward the argument from Trump’s lawyer that the gag order infringed on the former president’s First Amendment rights and “core political speech.” The panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit also indicated that it could reduce the order’s scope by allowing Trump to publicly attack special counsel Jack Smith, who is overseeing the federal prosecutions of the former president, while maintaining a ban on criticizing witnesses and court staff. Courthouse News: Second Circuit panel lukewarm on Jewish CUNYs professors’ claims over union BDS endorsement By Josh Russell .....A federal appeals court panel appeared skeptical on Monday as it was asked to revive a constitutional challenge by a group of self-proclaimed Zionist Jewish professors at the City University of New York system against the college’s faculty union over diverging beliefs on the contentious Israel-Palestine conflict. The group of six CUNY teachers claim the trade union that represents some 30,000 faculty and professional staff at the City University of New York campuses, the Professional Staff Congress, infringed on their free speech and associational rights by forcing them to accept what they view as a “hostile political group” in support of Palestine as their exclusive agent for speaking and contracting with their government employer. Free Expression Reuters: Law school free speech proposal moves forward after ABA vote By Karen Sloan .....A plan that would require all American Bar Association-accredited law schools to establish free speech policies cleared a key hurdle on Friday amid mounting campus tensions over conflict in the Middle East. The ABA’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, which oversees law schools, voted unanimously to send the free speech proposal to the ABA’s House of Delegates in February for final approval. The ABA’s law school accreditation rules have long protected the academic freedom of faculty, but this standard would be the first address free speech for the entire law school community. National Review: ‘DEI’ Is an Enemy of Free Speech, Not a Friend By Stanley Goldfarb .....A good example of this Orwellian sleight of hand is the Association of American Medical Colleges, which essentially controls every medical school in the United States and Canada. At its annual meeting earlier this month, the AAMC loudly emphasized its commitment to free speech, while its president lamented attempts to “shut down opposing views on sensitive cultural and political issues.” In fact, the AAMC is the one shutting down debate by forcing DEI on medical-school faculty and students alike, with harmful consequences for the patient care that medical school is supposed to teach. Reason: Free Speech Advocates Are Often Hypocrites. This Doesn't Make the Cause Less Important. By Musa Al-Gharbi .....Censorship has been getting more prevalent in the sciences, and it's driven heavily by scientists themselves. Those are the core findings in a new paper for the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, led by behavioral scientist Cory Clark and co-authored by myself and colleagues from several disciplines. We found that the censorship—and self-censorship—is typically motivated by pro-social concerns, such as curbing misinformation or preventing harm to vulnerable populations. Time: Choose Counterspeech Over Cancel Culture By Nadine Strossen and Pamela Paresky .....Given that some cancelations are justified, how do we determine when they are appropriate, and how can we avoid fostering a cancel culture—which is inimical to both free speech and a pluralist, liberal democracy? These issues turn on a number of considerations that should be evaluated contextually in light of the specifics of each situation. The States Washington Post (Daily 202): Don’t lie with AI in Michigan political ads. By Olivier Knox .....Michigan’s legislature has sent Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) legislation requiring disclosures on political ads that use artificial intelligence (AI) and punishing campaigns for using intentionally deceptive AI materials known as “deepfakes,” per Kyle Davidson at the Michigan Advance. Failure to disclose the use of AI to generate an ad would carry a maximum fine of $250 for a first offense, while each subsequent violation would cost $1,000. Each advertisement that is distributed or aired would be considered a separate violation with some exemptions for parody or satire ads and the media,” Davidson reported. Using “deepfakes” — using AI to generate images of someone saying something they never said, for instance — would be a little more expensive. A maximum fine of $500 and up to 90 days in prison for a first offense. And another violation within five years would be a felony carrying up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $1,000. Texas Tribune: Ken Paxton announces investigation of media group following Elon Musk’s lawsuit By William Melhado .....Attorney General Ken Paxton announced an investigation Monday evening into Media Matters for possible fraudulent activity in response to the media watchdog group’s report last week that prompted companies to pull advertisements from X, the site formerly known as Twitter. Earlier on Monday, X CEO Elon Musk filed a federal lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas against Media Matters, alleging the organization manipulated information it gathered to defame the social media company. Paxton said his office would investigate allegations that Media Matters — which he referred to as a “radical anti-free speech organization” — had violated Texas laws protecting consumers from fraud. “We are examining the issue closely to ensure that the public has not been deceived by the schemes of radical left-wing organizations who would like nothing more than to limit freedom by reducing participation in the public square,” Paxton said in a statement Monday evening. 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]