January 9, 2024

Supreme Court

The Verge: Supreme Court rejects decade-old Twitter First Amendment case

By Adi Robertson

.....The Supreme Court has declined a long-running legal challenge from X Corp., formerly Twitter, over whether it can publicly reveal US government demands for user data. X Corp. v. Garland was on a list of denied petitions released this morning. That leaves X with a March 2023 ruling that the First Amendment doesn’t protect Twitter from limits on reporting national security demands — a ruling civil liberties organizations say sets a disappointingly low bar for censorship.

Twitter filed its original suit in 2014, the year after whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed details of extensive secret US telecoms surveillance. In the wake of those disclosures, social networks won the option to report how many demands agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation had made, but — thanks to government nondisclosure requirements — only in extraordinarily broad ranges. Twitter sought to publish the exact number of requests it received within a six-month period, arguing that redactions demanded by the FBI overstepped the First Amendment.

The Courts

Mediaite: Trump Demands Election Crimes Case Be Dropped In New Filing — Because Nobody Told Him Overturning Election Was Crime

By Tommy Christopher

.....Former President Donald Trump demanded the election crimes case against him be dismissed on the grounds that he didn’t have advance notice he would be committing a crime by trying to overturn the election…

In a new filing to the Fulton County Superior Court to presiding Judge Scott McAfee, Trump’s attorney argued Trump “lacked fair notice” that his conduct could be considered criminal:

“Our country has a longstanding tradition of forceful political advocacy regarding widespread allegations of fraud and irregularities in a long list of Presidential elections throughout our history, therefore, President Trump lacked fair notice that his advocacy in the instance of the 2020 Presidential Election could be criminalized. President Trump, like all citizens, is entitled to have fair warning as to where the line is drawn which separates permissible activity from that which is allegedly criminal. See United States v. Lanier, 520 U.S. 259, 265 (1997) (‘No man shall be held criminally responsible for conduct which he could not reasonably understand to be proscribed.').

‘Due process bars courts from applying a novel construction of a criminal statute to conduct that neither the statute nor any prior judicial decision has fairly disclosed to be within its scope…’ Id. at 266 (internal citations omitted).

‘[A] statute or a rule may be held constitutionally invalid as applied when it operates to deprive an individual of a protected right although its general validity as a measure enacted in the legitimate exercise of state power is beyond question.” Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 379 (1971).’”

Courthouse News: A group representing TikTok, Meta and X sues Ohio over new law limiting kids’ use of social media

By Associated Press

.....A trade group representing TikTok, Snapchat, Meta and other major tech companies sued Ohio on Friday over a pending law that requires children to get parental consent to use social media apps.

The law was part of an $86.1 billion state budget bill that Republican Gov. Mike DeWine signed into law in July. It’s set to take effect Jan. 15. The administration pushed the measure as a way to protect children's mental health, with Republican Lt. Gov. Jon Husted saying at the time that social media was “intentionally addictive” and harmful to kids.

The NetChoice trade group filed its lawsuit against GOP Attorney General Dave Yost in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. It seeks to block the law from taking effect.

The litigation argues that Ohio’s law — which requires social media companies to obtain a parent’s permission for children under 16 to sign up for social media and gaming apps — unconstitutionally impedes free speech and is overbroad and vague.

Courthouse News: Federal appeals court says Iowa’s ‘ag-gag’ laws don’t violate free speech

By Rox Laird

.....Two Iowa laws aimed at protecting livestock facilities from animal rights groups trespassing to conduct surveillance and report animal abuse are not unconstitutional, the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held Monday.

In both rulings, a three-judge panel of the St. Louis, Missouri-based appellate court reversed district court rulings that struck down two to versions of the so-called “ag-gag” law unconstitutional violations of the First Amendment rights of the animal rights groups. The panel, however, preserved one issue for further trial court proceedings.

Congress

Daily Caller: EXCLUSIVE: GOP Rep Demands IRS Show Plans To Crack Down On Leakers To Protect Taxpayers

By Henry Rodgers

.....House Committee on Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith sent a letter Monday to the IRS commissioner demanding he provide a detailed plan on how the agency will protect taxpayers’ private information after a former IRS contractor leaked former President Donald Trump’s tax returns.

The Daily Caller first obtained a copy of the letter to Commissioner Daniel Werfel which mentions Charles Edward Littlejohn, the former IRS contractor who pleaded guilty in October to leaking Trump’s tax returns and more tax data to media outlets. In the letter, Smith asks for answers to several questions regarding the leak and what the IRS plans on doing so it does not occur again.

“The IRS has continually proven it cannot be trusted to safeguard taxpayers’ private information, and the responsibility now falls to Congress and the Ways and Means Committee to ensure the agency does its job, complies with the law, and protects American taxpayers. Commissioner Werfel must provide Congress with a plan showing how the IRS will prevent current and future IRS employees from following the lead of Charles Edward Littlejohn and disclosing taxpayer information to further one party’s political agenda,” Smith told the Caller before sending the letter.

Washington Post (Technology 202): Congress, lagging on AI rules, may be ahead of the curve on AI use

By Cristiano Lima

.....U.S. lawmakers have launched a “cautious yet proactive exploration” of how to use generative AI tools — such as OpenAI’s popular ChatGPT chatbot — to “support legislative processes,” the POPVOX Foundation nonprofit wrote in the report...

The House of Representatives in particular has taken notable steps to consider how the tools might streamline work for congressional staffers, the group wrote in the report, shared first with The Technology 202:

The States

Nebraska Examiner: ‘It’s scary close’: Nebraska lawmakers react to AI voice clones, possible regulations

By Zach Wendling

.....State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha plans to introduce legislation to address certain AI disclosures. His proposal would mirror a Michigan law that requires disclosure of AI if used in political advertisements.

Michigan is the fifth state to enact a law regulating such content, or deepfakes. The others are California, Minnesota, Texas and Washington. More states are considering legislation, as is Congress.

“As technology advances, we need to be sure that it is not abused and take reasonable steps as a state to regulate the use of artificial intelligence in campaigns,” Cavanaugh said in a text.

Unlike the Michigan legislation, which includes criminal penalties, Cavanaugh said his bill would carry civil penalties through the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission.

News Center Maine: Inside the effort to shut down SLAPP lawsuits in Maine

By Donovan Lynch

.....This week, legislators will be considering a bill to expand anti-SLAPP laws.

Current state law protects individuals from SLAPP suits only in government proceedings—like testimony or legislative debate. Under LD 870, sponsored by State Senator Mike Tipping (D-Penobscot), that would extend to more public spaces, shielding SLAPPS from moving forward in other forums, like newspapers and social media.

Tipping said the legislation is based on New York's anti-SLAPP law, which is one of the stronger of its kind in a nation where 30 states have some kind of restrictions on frivolous lawsuits, but where no federal guidelines on the topic exist. 

“What we want to see is a mechanism where bogus lawsuits can be thrown out earlier,” Tipping said on Saturday.

Right now, Tipping added, Maine is far from that point. 

Irish Rover: Tamara Kay v. The Irish Rover Dismissed

By Editorial Staff

.....The defamation lawsuit brought against the Irish Rover by Prof. Tamara Kay in June 2023 was dismissed by St. Joseph County, Indiana, Superior Court on Jan 8, 2024, under Indiana’s Anti-SLAPP law.