March 18, 2024

Supreme Court

SCOTUSblog: Public officials can be held liable for blocking critics on social media

By Amy Howe

.....The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that public officials who post about topics relating to their work on their personal social media accounts are acting on behalf of the government, and therefore can be held liable for violating the First Amendment when they block their critics, only when they have the power to speak on behalf of the state and are actually exercising that power.

The court’s decisions came in a pair of cases, involving local officials in California and Michigan who blocked constituents who made repetitive and critical comments on their personal social media accounts.

SCOTUSblog: Efforts to quell online disinformation face free speech challenge at Supreme Court

By Amy Howe

.....Less than one month after hearing oral arguments in a pair of challenges to controversial laws in Texas and Florida that would regulate how large social media companies control content posted on their sites, the Supreme Court will hear argument in a challenge by the Biden administration to a federal court’s order that would limit the ability of government officials to communicate with social media companies about their content moderation policies.

Ed. note: Read our amicus brief in support of respondents here.

Washington Examiner: The Supreme Court must protect the First Amendment in Murthy v. Missouri

By Sen. Eric Schmitt

.....When I filed the lawsuit with Louisiana in 2022, we took the unique step of fighting to get discovery at the beginning stages of the lawsuit. This effort uncovered more than I could ever have imagined. The lengths and depths that the Biden administration went to censor what it deemed as “misinformation” or “disinformation,” including topics that were later to be proven as true, should shock every American.

SCOTUSblog: Justices to hear NRA’s free speech argument against New York financial services official

By Amy Howe

.....The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Monday in a dispute over a lower court’s order that would limit the federal government’s abilities to communicate with social media platforms about their content moderation policies. When that case has finished, the justices will move quickly into a closely related dispute, in which the National Rifle Association alleges that a New York official violated the group’s right to freedom of speech by urging banks and insurance companies that worked with the NRA to cut ties with the group.

Ed. note: Read Barnaby Zall's April 2023 guest blog post about NRA v. Vullo here.

The Courts

Washington Post: Group sues after novel Biden deepfake urged voters to skip N.H. primary

By Tobi Raji

.....A voting advocacy group is suing a political consultant and companies behind an AI-generated robocall of President Biden that in January urged New Hampshire voters not to participate in the state’s presidential primary.

The League of Women Voters of New Hampshire accuses campaign consultant Steve Kramer and telecom companies Life Corp. and Lingo Telecom of voter intimidation, coercion and deception in violation of federal and state laws, including the Voting Rights Act and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of New Hampshire on behalf of three voters who said they received the robocalls, asks a judge to fine the defendants and block them from producing, generating or distributing other robocalls generated with artificial intelligence.

The Media

Racket News: On Today’s Absurd New York Times Hit Piece

By Matt Taibbi

.....In advance of oral arguments in the Supreme Court for Murthy v. Missouri, formerly Missouri v. Biden, the New York Times and authors Jim Rutenberg and Steven Lee Myers wrote a craven and dishonest piece called, “How Trump’s Allies Are Winning the War Over Disinformation.”

The Times implies both the Twitter Files reports and my congressional testimony with Michael Shellenberger were strongly influenced by former Trump administration official Mike Benz, whose profile occupies much of the text.

Reason: ACLU, Once a Defender of Free Speech, Goes After a Whistleblower

By J.D. Tuccille

....."Strange evening," journalist Jesse Singal wrote March 7 on X (formerly Twitter). "The ACLU of Missouri subpoenaed Jamie Reed, demanding (among other stuff) all her communications w/me. I emailed them saying (politely) wtf, you're the ACLU. Got a call from a lawyer there saying it was a mistake – 'It's a big team.' Okay."

The subpoena Singal attached (supposedly since modified, though a redacted version of the original remains publicly available through the Missouri courts website) demanded of Reed "all communications, including any documents exchanged, between you and Jessie Singal concerning Gender-Affirming Care provided at or through the Center." It also sought "all communications, including any documents exchanged, concerning Gender-Affirming Care involving media or between you and any media outlet or any member of the media" (journalist Benjamin Ryan says that would include him). The subpoena also demanded Reed's communications with state officials, legislators, and advocacy organizations.

The States

The Detroit News: House Democrats push campaign finance, lobby disclosures in new bill package

By Beth LeBlanc

.....A group of Michigan House Democrats have introduced a series of seven bills that seek to tighten controls on dark money funds, shed more light on lobbyist spending and largely require more disclosure from lawmakers and other state-level public officials.

The package of bills dubbed the BRITE Act — Bringing Reforms in Integrity, Transparency and Ethics — comes months after Democratic leadership blocked similar reforms in favor of a bare-bones public disclosure policy demanded by voters in 2022.

But lawmakers said the passage of minimal disclosure requirements last year was just a start that they intend to build on with the current package. The bills were introduced during Sunshine Week and on the same day a Senate committee moved legislation that would expand public record requests to the Legislature and the Governor’s Office.

Philadelphia Inquirer: Pa. lawmaker wants to limit how political campaigns use AI

By Gillian McGoldrick

.....Before AI takes Clout’s job (and maybe your job, too), state lawmakers want to block political campaigns from using AI-generated voices. State Rep. Doyle Heffley (R., Carbon) said he plans to introduce legislation to ban the practice, saying “technology can create fake voices that are incredibly close to that of the original subject.”