January 19, 2024

Free Expression

The New York Review: Who’s Canceling Whom?

By David Cole

.....The instantly notorious exchange in a congressional hearing on December 5 between Representative Elise Stefanik and the presidents of Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology laid bare once again the fragility of our collective commitment to free speech. Stefanik repeatedly asked the presidents whether a student calling for the genocide of Jews (which she equated with calling for “intifada”) would violate their institutions’ codes of conduct or constitute bullying or harassment. Each one replied, in effect, “It depends.”

Despite the outrage that followed, that’s actually the right answer if universities respect free speech principles. As a general matter, advocating for genocide or saying any number of other hateful things is protected by the First Amendment. If a woman stood on a street corner across from Congress holding a sign calling for the genocide of Jews, government officials could take no action against her. Even hateful speech calling for unconscionable acts of violence is protected by the First Amendment unless it falls within very narrow exceptions, such as genuine threats of violence or “incitement” that is both intended and likely to produce imminent violence. The sign would fit none of those categories.

Daily Caller: Global Elite Claims Gov ‘Disinformation’ Censorship Ensures ‘People Will Get The Facts Right’ At Davos

By Jason Cohen

.....A European Commission (EC) official asserted that government “disinformation” censorship is essential to ensure individuals receive factual information at the World Economic Forum’s Davos conference on Thursday.

EC Vice-President for Values and Transparency Vera Jourová made the remarks during a discussion on “Defending Truth” with fellow panelists from The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. The European Union (EU) has a regulatory agenda that cracks down on “disinformation” worldwide, as it applies to large online platforms that are incentivized to implement global policies.

Supreme Court

James Madison Center for Free Speech: The Madison Center Amicus Brief in US Supreme Court Arguing that President Trump Did Not Engage in Insurrection and Cannot be Disqualified from the 2024 Ballot

By James Bopp, Jr.

.....On Thursday, the James Madison Center for Free Speech filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of President Donald Trump being restored to the Colorado presidential ballot...

Section Three's prohibition against having “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” requires a direct, overt act of insurrection, not incitement through speech. The Colorado Supreme Court erred when it held that mere incitement of insurrection was enough.

And the Colorado Supreme Court compounded its error by also incorrectly finding that President Trump's speech on January 6th on Washington D.C.'s Ellipse ‘incited” the attack on the Capitol. The Colorado Supreme Court cherry-picked out-of-context statements by President Trump to build its false case for incitement and imported inapplicable legal points of law to jerry-rig its analysis of his Ellipse speech.

The States

Naples Press: Florida’s revised defamation bill attacks constitution and conservative media

By Trey Radel

.....Florida Republican lawmakers are once again on the attack against liberal mainstream media. Their goal is to pass a new bill making it easier to sue news organizations and hold them accountable for their distortions of the truth. It sounds great in theory, but I believe conservative media will, undoubtedly, be hit the hardest.

As a Republican who works in the media, I empathize with the frustration of conservatives every time I see hit pieces, headlines and the overall framing of news stories written to run cover for the Democratic Party or intentionally hurt Republicans. Clearly, the author of the bill, Rep. Alex Andrade, R-Pensacola, feels the same way. I believe his intentions are noble.

Unfortunately, this renewed effort to revise defamation laws in the state stirs deep concerns, echoing the same fears I voiced earlier last year. The initial bill, HB 991, would have stifled political speech and increased the legal vulnerability of media, including conservative outlets.

Reason (Volokh Conspiracy):  Court Lets First AI Libel Case Go Forward

By Eugene Volokh

.....Georgia Gwinnett County Superior Court Judge Tracie Cason's decision last week in Walters v. OpenAI, LLC simply says that it denies OpenAI's motion to dismiss, and (as is common in many state courts) doesn't offer a detailed explanation. But here's an excerpt from Walters' response to OpenAI's motion to dismiss; presumably the judge agreed with much of the response (for more on this sort of question, see my Large Libel Models article):

Maine Morning Star: Anti-super PAC campaign raises over $1 million for Maine referendum effort

By Emma Davis

.....A campaign finance reform effort in Maine has raised upwards of $1 million dollars from more than 100 donors from across the U.S., according to a major contributor report filed with the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Elections Practice on Tuesday. 

On face value, the petition campaign seeks to limit contributions to independent political action committees, otherwise known as super PACs. The ultimate goal, however, is to get the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that PACs should be regulated.

The legal scholar and political activist behind the initiative, Lawrence Lessig, has been trying to advance the effort for years with his non-profit EqualCitizens.US, which is based out of Boston, Massachusetts. After attending a dinner in Maine last summer organized by LeadershipNow, Lessig saw Maine’s citizen-initiated referendum process as a path forward. 

The Hill: Florida bill could lead to ban on pride flags in schools, government buildings

By Elizabeth Crisp

.....Florida lawmakers are mulling legislation that would ban gay pride flags and flags representing other political movements from flying on public properties, including schools and college campuses.

An initial House panel advanced the bill in a party-line vote this week.