January 25, 2024

New from the Institute for Free Speech

Institute for Free Speech and Moms for Liberty Urge the Supreme Court to Let States Protect Free Political Expression on Social Media

.....The Institute for Free Speech and Moms for Liberty (M4L) have filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold certain provisions of Texas and Florida laws prohibiting social media platforms from censoring users’ viewpoints.

The laws aim to stop powerful tech companies like Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and YouTube from de-platforming or censoring users due to their ideological views while allowing the platforms to restrict certain types of content. The platforms challenged the laws, asserting the First Amendment protects all their activities.

As noted in the brief, the Institute and M4L agree that “social media platforms enjoy the fundamental First Amendment freedoms of speech and association, including the right to exercise editorial control over their own speech…. [Their rights] include the right to choose what kinds of services they wish to offer, and the right to empower their customers to control the type of content with which they interact.

“But laws barring viewpoint discrimination threaten none of these rights. They do not regulate the platforms’ own speech, nor do these provisions prevent the platforms’ users from choosing what speech they receive and with whom they interact. In addressing this problem, the states limit only the platforms’ power to censor the discrete speech of others based on viewpoint.”

Journalist Laura Belin Scores Fast Victory in Longstanding Dispute over Denial of Press Credentials

.....It took five years of determination, but reporter Laura Belin finally has her press credentials from the Iowa House of Representatives. 

The House Chief Clerk has now recognized the obvious truth that Belin has a First Amendment right to perform her vital role of informing the public without facing unfair obstacles. That resolution of a long-simmering dispute over free speech and press freedom rights came mere days after the filing of a federal lawsuit by the Institute for Free Speech. 

Belin has sought press credentials from the Iowa House of Representatives before every legislative session since January 2019. In her requests, Belin has demonstrated how her independent online news site, Bleeding Heartland, meets the House’s stated requirements for media access. Belin also now works as the Statehouse reporter for KHOI Radio.   

Supreme Court

Election Law Blog: Trump Files Amicus Brief in Supreme Court Supporting Constitutionality of Florida’s Social Media Law

By Rick Hasen

.....Read it here.

The Courts

Texas Observer: The Judges Who Rules Against La Gordiloca Are Criminalizing Watchdog Journalism

By Jason Buch

.....In a blow to First Amendment advocates, a majority of the judges on the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decided Tuesday not just to throw out a lawsuit by the Laredo citizen journalist and provocateur who goes by the name La Gordiloca, but to endorse an expansive view of government power that permits police to arrest reporters for seeking basic information through backchannels.

Congress

Washington Examiner: Lawmaker demands discipline for dark-money group targeting attorneys on Trump’s election lawsuits

By Cami Mondeaux

.....A House Republican is pressing the American Bar Association to take “stringent action” against a group seeking to disbar lawyers who worked on former President Donald Trump‘s lawsuits to overturn the results of the 2020 election in multiple states.

In a letter sent to the ABA on Wednesday, Rep. Lance Gooden (R-TX) urged the bar association to discipline the 65 Project, a dark-money organization with ties to the Democratic Party seeking to discredit lawyers who helped push Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen. As part of his plea, Gooden demanded the association disregard the group’s attempts to disbar lawyers who took part in any of the 65 lawsuits challenging President Joe Biden’s victory.

“Any current or future member of the Bar or a trained legal professional that assists, partakes, supports, or is involved in any capacity in unwarranted political targeting of fellow Bar members must face strict disciplinary action,” Gooden wrote in the letter that was obtained exclusively by the Washington Examiner. “Stringent action is needed to restore balance, professionalism, and impartiality to the legal field. This is a pivotal moment to realign the legal profession within ethical moorings, free from political bias.”

FEC

The Hill: Democratic groups file complaint in push to force No Labels to reveal donors

By Filip Timotija

.....Two Democratic-aligned groups filed campaign finance complaints seeking to force No Labels to reveal its donors, part of a broader push to scrutinize the group that for months has teased a “unity” ticket that Democrats view as a general election threat.

End Citizens United filed complaints with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Federal Election Commission (FEC) alleging “fraudulent” misuse of the No Labels’s 501(c)(4) nonprofit status. Accountable.US, another Democratic-aligned organization, filed a complaint with Colorado’s Secretary of State.

The complaint hopes to force No Labels to follow the same rules as a formal political party, including revealing donors.

Free Expression

The Eternally Radical Idea: Yes, the last 10 years really have been worse for free speech

By Greg Lukianoff

.....ACLU National Legal Director David Cole has a review of my and Rikki Schlott’s book, “The Canceling of the American Mind,” coming out in the February 8 edition of the New York Review of Books. Overall I thought it was quite positive, but Cole made some arguments — which we actually hear quite often — that I think need addressing.

Before I do that, though, I want to stress that I both like and greatly respect David Cole. I also appreciate that the New York Review of Books found such a serious thinker on the topic of freedom of speech to review our book, as opposed to the many First Amendment skeptics these days who seem to think that simply employing a more advanced insult technology against those they disagree with is the same as refuting them (cough, cough — “The Lost Cause of Free Speech”).

I always welcome good-faith pushback — especially when it gives me an opportunity to go into more depth on why Rikki and I are so concerned about the current situation in higher education. All that said, here are some quotes from Cole’s review that I’d like to respond to:

New York Times Magazine: College Is All About Curiosity. And That Requires Free Speech.

By Stephen L. Carter

.....This year marks the 60th anniversary of the “free speech” movement that began among students at the University of California, Berkeley, and spread swiftly across the country. The anniversary is a reminder of a sort that students, too, are entitled to academic freedom — and I don’t just mean the freedom to protest, cherished as that right may be. What’s far more important is the freedom of students to grow into distinct thinking individuals. The student must be, in the phrasing of the German philosopher Friedrich Paulsen, “free to devote himself wholly to his task of forming himself into an independent personality.”

The States

New Jersey Monitor: Republicans’ challenge of defamation case tests new state law targeting frivolous lawsuits

By Dana DiFilippo

.....Republican officials in Englewood Cliffs have asked a state judge to dismiss a lawsuit accusing them of defaming a borough attorney in campaign material, the latest volley in a legal fight regarded as the first test of a new state law intended to crack down on lawsuits meant to silence critics.

Attorneys for Mark Park, Zhi Liang, and Rivka Biegacz — Republicans elected in November as mayor and borough council members, respectively — say the complaint Albert H. Wunsch III filed against them in October stifles constitutionally protected political speech and should have been tossed under a new law targeting civil lawsuits known as SLAPPs, short for strategic lawsuits against public participation.

A hearing is scheduled Friday afternoon in state Superior Court in Bergen County.

The Oregonian: Oregon voters likely to decide on dueling campaign finance measures this fall

By Carlos Fuentes

.....Gov. Tina Kotek says campaign finance limits will not come up this legislative session, so voters will almost certainly decide the issue through a ballot measure in November.

“I just feel like we’re looking at the ballot at this point,” Kotek told The Oregonian/OregonLive Editorial Board last week.

Oregon voters will likely face two similar-looking measures, each of which would limit how much individuals and groups can donate to candidates. However, one of the proposed measures, backed by labor unions, contains several loopholes that would allow unions to continue pouring millions into Oregon campaigns.

Courthouse News: Fox News can pursue free speech counterclaims against Smartmatic’s $2.7 billion defamation suit, judge rules

By Josh Russell

.....A judge in New York state supreme court ruled Tuesday that voting technology company Smartmatic cannot halt Fox News’ counterclaims accusing the voting machine company of suing the cable news giant for $2.7 billion to suppress Fox News’ free speech.