May 30, 2024

New from the Institute for Free Speech

Free Speech Protections Get a Boost as Minnesota Enacts a Strong New Anti-SLAPP Law

.....In a win for free speech and improved public discourse, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz has signed into law a robust new anti-SLAPP statute (HF 5216). SLAPP stands for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.” SLAPPs are a form of frivolous lawsuit often filed by wealthy individuals or entities with the goal of intimidating critics and draining their resources through lengthy, expensive legal battles. 

The new Minnesota law adopts the Uniform Law Commission’s model Uniform Public Expression Protection Act. It contains the key features outlined by free speech advocates across the political spectrum to create a strong deterrent against SLAPP suits: 

Supreme Court

Bloomberg Law: Supreme Court Revives NRA’s New York ‘Blacklisting’ Suit

By Greg Stohr

.....The US Supreme Court revived National Rifle Association claims that a New York state official unconstitutionally pressured insurance companies including Chubb Ltd. and Lloyd’s of London to stop doing business with the gun lobby.

The justices unanimously said the state’s alleged “blacklisting” of the NRA, if proven, would violate the group’s free speech rights. The ruling set aside a federal appeals court decision that backed former Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo.

The decision limits the power government officials have to use their positions in ways that might undermine work of advocacy groups. The court is considering similar issues in a still-pending fight over Biden administration communications with social media companies.

The Courts

Daily Wire: New York Attorney General Hit With Another Lawsuit Over Her Targeting Of Pro-Life Groups

By Leif Le Mahieu

.....New York Attorney General Letitia James was hit this month with a lawsuit over her targeting of pro-life organizations in the Empire State.

James is being sued by the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates, as well as Gianna’s House and Options Care Center. The pro-life groups say that James is violating the First Amendment through her own lawsuits against 11 crisis pregnancy centers and Heartbeat International, accusing them of false advertising. The pro-life organizations are being represented by Alliance Defending Freedom.

Nonprofit Law Prof Blog: An Update on Safe Space v. Commissioner

By Darryll K. Jones

.....We previously blogged here and here on Students and Academics for Free Expression, Speech, and Political Action in Campus Education, Inc (SAFE SPACE) v. Commissioner. That is the potentially blockbuster case concerning the political speech restrictions in IRC 501(c)(3). The latest news is that SAFE SPACE and the Commissioner have filed a joint motion to dismiss in order that the parties can perfect the record. According to the motion, the 1023 was incomplete when filed, a fact apparently not previously conveyed to SAFE SPACE. The motion states that it would be in the best interest of all to go back and fix the administrative record and then allow SAFE SPACE to file its complaint anew. This of course presumes that the Service will formally deny the application because SAFE SPACE candidly asserts that it plans to endorse candidates and lobby beyond just an insubstantial amount.  

But is the Service required to deny the application? It seems the Service's hands are tied by the clear language of 501(c)(3). What if Chief Counsel wrote a memorandum concluding that the political restrictions are unconstitutional? Relying on Citizens United, perhaps. Could the Service then simply issue a determination letter recognizing SAFE SPACE as a 501(c)(3) organization? It is not such a far fetched notion. Especially if the presumptive Republican nominee was in office today. 

Congress

The Hill: Vance asks Garland to probe gag order in Trump hush money case

By Alexander Bolton

.....Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) sent a letter Wednesday to Attorney General Merrick Garland asking the Justice Department to investigate whether the gag order placed on former President Trump in his New York hush money trial violates his constitutional rights…

Vance, who is seen as a possible running mate for Trump, says Merchan’s gag order “has imposed prior restraint on the protected speech of a former president who is now leading presidential polling of the next election.”

And he says the judge has made Trump “powerless to question the credibility of witnesses testifying against him.” ...

And Vance says that the prosecutors have repeatedly urged the judge to deprive Trump of his “First Amendment rights in court filings and oral advocacy,” making them — he argues — possible co-conspirators.

Free Expression

New York Times Magazine: The Battle Over College Speech Will Outlive the Encampments

By Emily Bazelon and Charles Homans

.....When [Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University Director Jameel] Jaffer heard the news, “I said, ‘Suspending the groups seems like a very draconian penalty for that offense,’” he recalled. When the administration in a public statement also cited the groups’ “threatening rhetoric and intimidation,” Jaffer grew more concerned: What speech crossed that line? In an open letter, he asked Columbia for an explanation.

The university didn’t publicly provide one, and the organizations received mixed messages from the administration. In a meeting with the student groups at the end of November, one administrator said that while the groups had not violated speech rules, Israeli students could hear accusations that Israel was committing genocide or was an apartheid state as an incitement to violence. “I left that meeting extremely confused,” said Maryam Alwan, an organizer of the S.J.P. chapter.

The States

People United for Privacy: 20 States Pass Bipartisan Privacy Law to Protect Americans From Doxing and Harassment

By Luke Wachob

.....Amid rising partisan hostility, an unlikely bipartisan movement to protect Americans’ privacy is flourishing in state legislatures.

On May 28, Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D) signed S.B. 24-129 into law, marking the 20^th state to adopt the Personal Privacy Protection Act (PPPA). The PPPA shields citizens’ names and home addresses when joining, volunteering for, or donating to nonprofit organizations. Specifically, the law prohibits state agencies from making unlawful demands or disclosures of citizens’ personal information in connection with their support for a nonprofit organization.

Courthouse News: Arizona governor vetoes bill criminalizing AI deepfakes

By Joe Duhownik

.....Arizona governor Katie Hobbs vetoed a bill that would establish criminal penalties for the creation and distribution of artificial intelligence-generated deepfakes, instead urging the state Senate on Wednesday to send her another bill she says “significantly overlaps with” the vetoed bill’s intent. 

Senate Bill 1336 would have prohibited the non-consensual dissemination of deepfake images of a person nude or engaging in sex acts, and established the crime as either a class 4 or class 6 felony, depending on intent, method of dissemination and impact to the victim. Republicans in both the House and the Senate unanimously supported the measure, but the Democratic vote was split down the middle in both chambers. 

Ohio Capital Journal: Ohio GOP leaders’ push to stop foreign money does nothing about transparency

By Marty Schladen

.....Among the measures being debated are requirements that groups supporting state and local initiatives form political action committees — a move that University of Cincinnati political scientist David Niven said would be “a massive imposition for what can be very humble ballot questions.”

If enacted, at least some of the proposals would take effect prior to the November election, when a constitutional amendment meant to address Ohio’s extreme gerrymandering is expected to be on the ballot. Just as LaRose’s measure last year was meant in part to stop abortion-rights and anti-gerrymandering amendments, there’s suspicion that some of the measures currently under debate are meant to stop this year’s gerrymandering measure.

Niven said it’s a bigger deal than that.

“It’s certainly an anti-citizens’-voice effort,” he said. “And I think its consequences would be far grander than making it marginally harder (to put on the ballot and pass the anti-gerrymandering) amendment. It’s creating campaign-finance requirements that would burden every ballot question from top to bottom no matter how obscure — even things Republicans wouldn’t object to.”

Voice of OC: More Orange County Cities Overhaul Campaign Finance Rules

By Hosam Elattar

.....A couple of Orange County cities are increasing limits on how much a person can financially donate to the political election campaigns of their preferred candidates ahead of the November 2024 election.

And officials in one of the smallest cities in the county – Stanton – moved the opposite direction, directing staff to look at reducing the campaign contribution limit.

Officials there are also looking into a significant overhaul in campaign finance rules, one that could potentially infuse taxpayer dollars into the election cycle in an effort to curb pay-to-play politics.

The changes come after a corruption scandal broke out in Anaheim, where FBI agents in sworn affidavits and city hired independent investigators in a corruption report last year accused Disneyland resort interests of having outsized influence over city hall.