The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech May 23, 2024 Click here to subscribe to the Daily Media Update. This is the Daily Media Update published by the Institute for Free Speech. For press inquiries, please contact [email protected]. In the News AP News: Bashing governor in publicly funded campaign ads is OK in Connecticut legislative races, court rules By Dave Collins .....Connecticut's Supreme Court on Monday ruled that state elections officials violated the constitutional free speech rights of two Republicans running for the state legislature when it fined them thousands of dollars for criticizing the Democratic governor in ads paid for by their publicly funded campaigns in 2014. In a 5-0 decision, the justices overturned the $5,000 civil fine against now-Sen. Rob Sampson and the $2,000 penalty against former Sen. Joe Markley imposed by the State Elections Enforcement Commission — a ruling their lawyer said could have influence in other states... Charles “Chip” Miller, a senior attorney at the Institute for Free Speech who represented the two lawmakers, said the Connecticut case appears to be the first of its kind and could have ramifications in other states if they seek outside guidance on the issue. The Courts San Francisco Chronicle: A press freedom fight is brewing in San Francisco that could impact all Americans By J. Israel Balderas .....The irony of Judge Orrick punishing U.S. News financially for filing a “meritless” lawsuit against Chiu’s office is alarming: Anti-SLAPP laws should protect the voice of the people. Now, it’s being wielded by two branches of government, punishing a news organization for daring to challenge the legality of subpoenas that threaten its editorial independence. This sets a dangerous precedent, suggesting that government investigatory actions, no matter how intrusive, are shielded from any legal challenges by the laws designed to protect free speech. Make no mistake: The subpoenas issued by the City Attorney’s Office represent a blatant attempt to undermine the news media’s autonomy and the First Amendment. By claiming that the inner workings of U.S. News and its journalistic process can be scrutinized by any government official — think about a future President Donald Trump — the city attorney is attempting to exert government control over the free flow of information. This is not a progressive value long championed by San Franciscans — it’s a hallmark of authoritarianism. Archive.today link Center Square Washington: Federal judge dismisses Washington medical lawsuit alleging free speech violations By TJ Martinell .....A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed against the Washington Medical Commission’s investigations of two licensed medical professionals accused of publishing false information about COVID-19. The lawsuit, which was co-filed against WMC Executive Director Kyle S. Karinen by former NBA basketball player and Gonzaga alumnus John Stockton, argued that the investigations violated the physicians’ right to free speech as well as those who wished to hear beliefs that went against “mainstream COVID narrative,” according to court documents. Wall Street Journal: Some Corporations Seek to Silence ‘Trojan Horse’ Activists By Richard Vanderford .....The Securities and Exchange Commission under the Biden administration has made it easier for investors to try to drag corporations into political and cultural battles, but brewing lawsuits seek to silence the activists... In one suit challenging the status quo, oil-and-gas company Exxon Mobil, a frequent target of shareholder proposals, sued two shareholder proponents, arguing that they were activists pursuing a “Trojan horse” strategy to gain a platform to deliberately hurt its business despite only holding a tiny amount of shares. In another suit now before a federal appeals court in New Orleans, the National Association of Manufacturers, a powerful Washington trade association, is arguing that the SEC has overstepped its bounds and shouldn’t be involved in deciding which proposals make it through. Congress National Review: Don’t Let the Sun Go Down on Section 230 By Jessica Melugin .....The House Energy and Commerce Committee released a draft bill to sunset the online liability shield commonly known as Section 230. The proposal is only about 50 words long, but if enacted, it would wreck the internet as we know it… Americans now enjoy an unprecedented democratization of speech. Never before have so many people had so much access to so much information, and never before have so many people had the chance to make their views heard, something that has caused alarm and spawned legislation designed to restrict free expression in less open societies across the world, from Merkel’s Germany to Putin’s Russia. But with great progress come great challenges. Criminal activity facilitated through social-media platforms and concerns about mental-health consequences for young users are driving efforts to curtail or repeal Section 230. So too is the fear of “disinformation” and “misinformation,” both abused concepts that are used as excuses to clamp down on dissenting opinions. FEC People United for Privacy: Bipartisan Support for Privacy Reform Gains Traction at FEC By Brian Hawkins .....At last week’s Federal Election Commission (FEC) meeting, the agency considered a proposal by Commissioner Allen Dickerson, a Republican appointee, to standardize the Commission’s decision-making process when evaluating requests from donors and entities to redact sensitive identifying information from public disclosure. While the Commission ultimately rejected Commissioner Dickerson’s placeholder guidance temporarily enacting the policy until a formal rule is adopted, the Commissioners took a significant step in tasking the Office of General Counsel with issuing a notice for proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to standardize the FEC’s redaction request policy. The NPRM will be followed by a public comment period for interested parties to submit feedback on the proposed rule. As People United for Privacy explained when supporting Commissioner Dickerson’s thoughtful proposal: FCC CNN: FCC is considering AI rules for political ads By Brian Fung .....The Federal Communications Commission is taking initial steps toward new rules that could require political ads on TV and radio to include disclaimers about the use of artificial intelligence. On Wednesday, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel called on other agency commissioners to support such regulations amid growing fears that AI-generated deepfakes could disrupt elections… Wednesday’s proposal aims to open a rulemaking process at the FCC that would likely take months to play out. The proposal calls for new rules governing broadcast TV and radio, as well as cable and satellite providers. Under the proposed rules, political advertisers on those mediums would have to make on-air disclosures if their ads contain AI-generated content... As part of the proposed rule, political advertisers would also have to provide written disclosures in the files that broadcasters are required to make available to the public. Free Expression New York Times: On Campus, a New Social Litmus Test: Zionist or Not? By Joseph Bernstein .....This pressure, some students say, has forced them to choose between their belief in the right of the Jewish state to exist and full participation in campus social life... The mandate to take a stand on Israel-Gaza — and for it to be seen as the right one — is often implicit, these students say, and sometimes it is pressed on them by people who aren’t campus activists, but friends and mentors. And ultimate Frisbee coaches. This month, a senior at Northwestern University walked into the office of the school’s Hillel executive director, Michael Simon, to tell him about a disturbing experience he’d just had. Days before, the senior, a team captain who requested anonymity because he feared future professional consequences, had learned of a voluntary team meeting to discuss the war in Gaza. Beforehand, over a video call, the team’s coach, Penelope Wu, shared with the captains a presentation that she planned to share at the meeting. It raised and dismissed several potential objections to the idea of a club Frisbee team holding a meeting about Mideast politics. Assertions like “Lake Effect is just a sports team” and “I’m not involved in this” were countered by the statements “Sports are political” and “Neutrality is inherently supportive of the oppressor.” It also included an agenda item called “Judaism vs. Zionism,” featuring material from Jewish Voice for Peace, an anti-Zionist Jewish activist group. Vox: “Everyone is absolutely terrified”: Inside a US ally’s secret war on its American critics By Zack Beauchamp .....Interviews with political figures, experts, and activists revealed a sustained campaign where Narendra Modi’s government threatens American citizens and permanent residents who dare speak out on the declining state of the country’s democracy. This campaign has not been described publicly until now because many people in the community — even prominent ones — are too afraid to talk about it... An American charity leader who spoke out on Indian human rights violations saw his Indian employees arrested en masse. An American journalist who worked on a documentary about India was put on a travel blacklist and deported. An American historian who studies 17th-century India received so many death threats that she could no longer speak without security. Even a member of Congress — and vocal critic of the Modi regime — said she was concerned about being banned from visiting her Indian parents... In some ways, the Indian campaign is more brazen than Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. While no evidence has emerged that Russia threatened harm against American citizens and their family members, India has been caught doing so repeatedly. And while Russian involvement in the 2016 election swayed few votes, there’s good reason to believe India’s campaign is working as intended — muting stateside criticism of India’s autocratic turn under Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). An American academic warned me that they couldn’t speak openly about India out of concern for family. An American think tank expert described numerous examples of censorship and self-censorship at prominent US institutions. Candidates and Campaigns The Hill: Trump launches crypto fundraising page By Brett Samuels .....Former President Trump’s campaign announced Tuesday that it is accepting donations via cryptocurrency — marking the first time a presidential nominee has expanded its fundraising to include digital currency. Donors will be allowed to give to the Trump campaign through its joint fundraising committees using any cryptocurrency accepted through the Coinbase Commerce product, the campaign said. Standard contribution limits and disclosure requirements from the Federal Election Commission will still apply to those donations. The States RealClearPennsylvania: The Dark Side of the Left’s Move to Ban 'Dark Money' By Matthew J. Brouillette .....Recently, a state House committee passed a Democrat-sponsored resolution calling on Congress to begin the process of amending the U.S. Constitution to allow states to force groups – which would include the NAACP – to hand over the names of their supporters to the government. The effort, which drew support even from multiple Republican lawmakers, is being pitched as a move to ban so-called “dark money.” The term refers to money used to advocate for or against causes or candidates by groups not required to disclose their donors. These groups often speak out on controversial issues. In addition to the NAACP, examples of such groups include Planned Parenthood and the ACLU on the Left, or, on the Right, Americans for Prosperity or my organization, Commonwealth Partners. The Advocate: What hasn't gone up since 1988? Campaign contribution limits. That's likely to change. By Tyler Bridges .....House 906 by Rep. Mark Wright would raise contribution limits from $5,000 to $12,000 per donor for candidates running for statewide office and in the four biggest parishes, from $2,500 to $6,000 for candidates running for the state Legislature and in smaller parishes and from $1,000 to $2,000 for many local elections. Wright said the increase simply reflects the cumulative rise in inflation since the current limits were established in 1988. “The cost of campaigns has gone up,” said Wright, R-Covington. The Detroit News: Michigan lawyer seeks ruling on lobbyist-gifted tickets after News investigation By Craig Mauger .....Bob LaBrant, the former general counsel for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, has asked Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson's office to rule on whether the system lobbyists have used to secretly provide event tickets to lawmakers is legal. LaBrant's request on Tuesday came a day after The Detroit News released the findings of an investigation into personal financial disclosures filed by lawmakers and the flow of sports and concert tickets from lobbyists to state officeholders. Michigan law bars registered lobbyists from providing legislators with gifts valued at more than $76, but lobbyists have found ways around the prohibition. Read an article you think we would be interested in? Send it to Tiffany Donnelly at [email protected]. For email filters, the subject of this email will always begin with "Institute for Free Speech Media Update." The Institute for Free Speech is a nonpartisan, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that promotes and defends the political rights to free speech, press, assembly, and petition guaranteed by the First Amendment. Please support the Institute's mission by clicking here. For further information, visit www.ifs.org. Follow the Institute for Free Speech The Institute for Free Speech | 1150 Connecticut Ave., NW Suite 801 | Washington, DC 20036 US Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice