March 5, 2024

New from the Institute for Free Speech

Moms for Liberty and Institute for Free Speech Ask Sixth Circuit to Protect First Amendment Rights at School Board Meetings

.....The First Amendment guarantees people the right to criticize their local public officials without the threat of censorship or retaliation.

That’s why the Institute for Free Speech has filed an appeal brief on behalf of the Wilson County chapter of Moms for Liberty, asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to reverse a district court decision that allowed a Tennessee school board to continue enforcing policies that violate citizens’ First Amendment right to free speech.

Supreme Court

SCOTUSblog: Justices set aside university free speech challenge

By Amy Howe

.....Amid the debate over free speech on university campuses, the justices on Monday set aside a decision by a federal appeals court in a case involving whether so-called “bias-response team policies” – procedures created by universities to solicit, track, and investigate reports of bias – chill students’ speech.

The order in Speech First v. Sands was part of a list of orders from the court’s private conference last week.

Over a dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas that was joined by Justice Samuel Alito, the court sent the case back to the lower courts with instructions to dismiss it as moot (that is, no longer a live controversy) because Virginia Tech, the university at the center of the case, had changed its policy.

ACLU: New York's Coercion of Private Companies to Blacklist the NRA Has a Long and Dark History

By Jennesa Calvo-Friedman

.....More than 60 years ago the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment bars the government from coercing private entities to punish speech that the government disfavors. Just as the government can’t directly punish or censor speech it disagrees with, it cannot do so indirectly by coercing private parties to do the same.

History underscores the importance of this free speech protection. Government officials have all too often enlisted private parties—from the White Citizens’ Councils of the Jim Crow South to the blacklists of Communists in the McCarthy era—to punish those with whom they disagree. New York’s efforts to punish the National Rifle Association, at issue before the Supreme Court in National Rifle Association v. Vullo, follow in the footsteps of those earlier censorship efforts.

The ACLU disagrees sharply with the NRA on many issues, yet we are representing the group in this case because of the First Amendment principles at stake.

The Courts

Politico: Appeals court slams Florida’s ‘Stop-Woke’ law for committing ‘greatest First Amendment sin’

By Andrew Atterbury

.....Florida is legally blocked from enforcing a key portion of the high-profile 2022 law restricting what Gov. Ron DeSantis called “woke” workplace trainings about race after a federal appeals court ruled Monday that the policy “exceeds the bounds of the First Amendment.”

A three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a blow to the DeSantis administration by deeming one of the Republican governor’s signature laws — the “Stop Woke” Act — unconstitutional, upholding a previous ruling that prevented it from taking hold. DeSantis officials, meanwhile, disagreed with the decision, signaling that the governor could ask the Supreme Court to weigh in.

“By limiting its restrictions to a list of ideas designated as offensive, the Act targets speech based on its content,” Judge Britt C. Grant, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, wrote in the opinion. “And by barring only speech that endorses any of those ideas, it penalizes certain viewpoints — the greatest First Amendment sin.”

Congress

Cato Daily Podcast: Mitch McConnell’s Legacy Includes Freeing Political Speech

.....In assessing the legacy of Mitch McConnell as a Republican leader in the U.S. Senate, it’s important to include his large role in radically reducing the regulation of Americans’ political speech. Cato’s John Samples explains.

Ed. note: Read IFS Chairman Bradley A. Smith's May 2021 National Review op-ed, "The First Amendment Is Lucky to Have Mitch McConnell, here.

FEC

Washington Examiner: DNC accuses RFK Jr.-backing super PAC of violating federal law with loan arrangement

By Peyton Sorosinski

.....The Democratic National Committee is accusing a pro-Robert F. Kennedy Jr. super PAC of not disclosing $10 million in loans in its latest attempt to foil RFK Jr.’s independent presidential bid. 

The DNC filed a complaint Monday against American Values 2024 with the Federal Election Commission, claiming that the super PAC is violating federal law for not disclosing a $10 million loan from Gavin de Becker, with $9.65 million having been repaid. 

The States

OPB: Oregon lawmakers could ask voters to impose campaign contribution limits this year

By Dirk VanderHart 

.....Oregon lawmakers are moving forward with a bill that would create limits on political giving for the first time in decades — and now they’ve included a provision designed to convince a competing proposal to back down.

The House Rules Committee on Monday morning held its second hearing on House Bill 4024, a proposal that top Democrats and Republicans in the House have hatched with the help of major business and labor groups.

A new amendment to the bill contains some notable changes from a version the committee heard in February. They include modestly tighter giving limits for some entities, a later date for regulations to take effect, and a rule designed to block incumbents from cherry picking their successor.

Reuters: Judge blocks Texas attorney general's demands for LGBT group's records

By Brendan Pierson

.....PFLAG, a leading U.S. LGBTQ advocacy group, on Friday won a temporary restraining order blocking demands from Texas' Republican attorney general for information about the group's work with families of transgender minors seeking gender-affirming treatments, such as puberty blockers and hormones.

The order, which will remain in effect for at least two weeks, from Travis County District Court Judge Maria Cantú Hexsel came in a lawsuit PFLAG filed Wednesday against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Hexsel set a hearing for March 25 on whether to block Paxton's demands for as long as the case is pending.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents PFLAG, said it was grateful for the ruling. Paxton's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment…

PFLAG said the demands were actually an effort to get around an automatic pause on discovery in the earlier lawsuits.

It said the demands would violate its rights of free speech and free assembly under the U.S. Constitution, and could expose the identities of patients and families who have sought information about gender-affirming care.

Federalist: Pennsylvania Partners With DHS, CISA Censors To Target Election Speech It Deems A ‘Threat’

By Brianna Lyman

.....Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro announced Thursday the state would partner with state and federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, to “mitigate threats” to elections, such as speech it deems “misinformation.” The Pennsylvania State Department separately revealed to The Federalist that the task force’s cooperation with DHS would include “continu[ing] to work closely” with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).