The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech December 13, 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]. Congress U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means: Oversight Subcommittee Hearing on Growth of the Tax-Exempt Sector and the Impact on the American Political Landscape Wednesday, December 13, 2023 at 2:00 PM. 1100 Longworth House Office Building Advisory Witness List: Justin Chung, Legislative Attorney, Congressional Research Service Scott Walter, President, Capital Research Center Stewart Whitson, Legal Director, Foundation for Government Accountability Philip Hackney, Associate Professor of Law, University of Pittsburgh Video People United for Privacy: PUFP Cautions Congress Against Threatening Americans’ Privacy Rights Over Foreign Influence Allegations By Alex Baiocco .....In a statement to members of the U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight, People United for Privacy (PUFP) urged Congress not to sacrifice Americans’ free speech and privacy rights in an attempt to address allegations of foreign influence in elections. PUFP’s statement explains that rushing to respond to unfounded hysteria with new legislation or regulations could result in serious harm to the First Amendment and discourage Americans from participating in important policy debates. In recent years, members of both political parties have seized on fears of foreign influence in elections as a pretense for pursuing broader and unrelated political goals. Allegations of foreigners covertly donating to nonprofits to fund political advocacy are overblown, and a robust framework of laws and regulations already prohibits and prevents foreign funding of election activity. Statement for the record (PDF) Supreme Court Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): Cato Amicus Brief in the Texas and Florida Social Media Cases By Ilya Somin .....The Cato Institute recently filed a Supreme Court amicus brief in Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton, cases challenging Florida and Texas state laws barring major social media firms from using most types of content moderation. Although I serve as the B. Kenneth Simon Chair in Constitutional Studies at Cato (in addition to my primary job as a law professor at George Mason University), I was not involved in writing this brief. But I very much agree with the points made by my colleagues Thomas Berry and Anastasia Boden. They urge the Court to, if necessary, overrule its badly misguided 1980 decision in Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins. Here is their summary of the brief: CNN Politics: Supreme Court won’t let RFK Jr. intervene in case challenging efforts to combat social media disinformation By Devan Cole .....The Supreme Court on Monday declined to let Robert F. Kennedy Jr. join a challenge to a case concerning the Biden administration’s communications with social media companies about online posts the government views as disinformation. Conservative Justice Samuel Alito said in a brief dissent that he would have allowed Kennedy to intervene in the case, which the high court will hear this term. The Courts Fox News: ACLU stands up for Christian organization after DC Metro rejects ads: 'Selective censorship' By Kristine Parks .....The ACLU and its Washington D.C. chapter filed a legal complaint on behalf of WallBuilders, a group which is devoted to educating the public on the role the Founders' faith played in America's beginning. The Christian organization sought to put up banners on the sides of WMATA buses, but were denied because they allegedly violated advertising restrictions. WMATA, a government entity, cited rules prohibiting advertisements "intended to influence members of the public regarding an issue on which there are varying opinions," and those that "promote or oppose any religion." … "The case against WMATA is a critical reminder of what’s at stake when government entities exercise selective censorship. The First Amendment doesn’t play favorites; it ensures that all voices, regardless of their message, have the right to be heard," Arthur Spitzer, Senior Counsel at the ACLU-D.C said in a press release. Portland Press Herald: Maine media groups, utilities challenge new law on foreign spending on referendums By Rachel Ohm .....Maine’s two largest power companies and groups representing Maine media outlets filed separate federal lawsuits Tuesday challenging a state law passed by voters in November to ban foreign governments and affiliated organizations from spending money on state and local referendum campaigns. One of the lawsuits, filed by the Maine Association of Broadcasters and Maine Press Association, takes issue with a part of the new law requiring news outlets to establish “due diligence policies” to ensure that they do not run ads that are paid for by foreign government-influenced entities. “The Act imposes a censorship mandate on Maine’s news outlets,” Sigmund Schutz, an attorney for the MAB and MPA, said in a statement. “It is content-based regulation of political speech and is therefore subject to the highest level of constitutional scrutiny under the First Amendment. “If news outlets are forced to investigate political advertisers and take down their ads, what other content and messaging will they be forced to investigate and remove next? Paid political advertising is entitled to First Amendment protections just like other editorial content.” NBC News: Media Matters sues Texas attorney general over response to Elon Musk dispute By David Ingram .....Media Matters for America sued Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in federal court late Monday, alleging that Paxton violated the First Amendment last month and chilled its work when he opened an investigation into the organization over its reporting into Elon Musk’s X app. Free Expression Boston Globe: Colleges shouldn’t usher in a new era of speech codes By Nico Perrino .....If the college presidents’ disastrous appearance before Congress last week results in new speech codes restricting expression on campus, the cause of free speech will be set back decades. Already, we’re seeing the initial demands to ban “calls for genocide” shift to demands for “hate speech” codes. The board of advisers to the University of Pennsylvania’s prestigious Wharton School of business wants such a code. Governor Kathy Hochul of New York sent a letter demanding the state’s college presidents not tolerate “hatred of any kind.” But there is no blanket “hate speech” or “calls for genocide” exception to the First Amendment — and for good reason. When colleges implement broad speech bans that are untethered from existing legal standards, campus bureaucrats inevitably use them to punish speech they simply dislike. Archive.today Candidates and Campaigns AP News: DeSantis’ campaign and allied super PAC face new concerns about legal conflicts, AP sources say By Steve Peoples and Thomas Beaumont .....Specifically, there has been concern in recent weeks among some within DeSantis’ operation that interactions between his campaign and his network of outside groups are blurring the lines of what’s legally permissible. The States KRWC: New Campaign Finance Law to Take Effect January 1st By Tim Matthews .....A new law that will impact election financing will take effect in Minnesota January 1st. The goal of the law that was passed during the 2023 legislative session is to restrict campaign financing or promotion of candidates or ballot questions by contributors tied to companies outside the United States. Under the new law, “foreign-influenced corporations” will no longer be able to make contributions to a candidate or a candidate’s principal campaign committee; make contributions to a political committee, political fund or party unit; take any action to publicly endorse or oppose a candidate or ballot question; promote or defeat a candidate for nomination, election or appointment to a public office; or promote or defeat a ballot question or qualify a ballot question for placement on the ballot. Politico: ‘More money, less disclosure’: N.J.’s new elections law fails a key test By Matt Friedman .....Joe Donohue, who leads the state’s election watchdog agency, said the law in some ways did increase transparency. It retools a previous “dark money” disclosure rule overturned in federal court by more narrowly defining which groups have to disclose spending to influence an election, a change that requires nonprofits to report donations. And for most political committees, it lowers the threshold for small-dollar donations that are required to be reported. But opponents like the League of Women Voters and state Republicans argue it will ultimately make the process less transparent and more favorable to entrenched interests. They note how it doubles and even triples campaign contribution limits, greatly reduces the statute of limitations on prosecuting campaign finance violations and all but eliminates New Jersey pay-to-play laws that barred companies that make major donations from getting contracts. Federalist: Missouri Investigates Media Matters For Fraudulently Fundraising Off Of Efforts To Demonetize Free Speech By Jordan Boyd .....Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is investigating Media Matters for America for “potentially unlawful business practices” including allegedly using fraud to bully advertisers from abandoning their partnerships with social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. In his letter announcing the investigation, Bailey warned that Media Matters’ attempt to punish “the last platform dedicated to free speech in America” could constitute a violation of his state’s consumer protection laws barring nonprofits from “soliciting funds under false pretenses.” 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]