The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech July 16, 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 Colorado Sun: Two-week trial begins in lawsuit challenging Colorado’s campaign contribution limits By Sandra Fish .....A two-week trial began Monday in the federal lawsuit seeking to overturn Colorado’s voter-approved state campaign contribution limits, which are among the lowest in the country. The case was brought by three Republicans, who, backed by lawyers from a conservative political nonprofit, argue Colorado’s limits benefit self-funding candidates who can bankroll their campaigns. “The evidence will show the contribution limits are too restrictive,” said Ryan Morrison, an attorney with the Institute for Free Speech, a conservative national nonprofit. “Colorado’s limits significantly restrict the amount of funding available for challengers to run competitive campaigns.” Voters overwhelmingly adopted Colorado’s donation limits in 2022 through an amendment to the state constitution. They are now $1,450 for candidates for statewide office and $450 for state legislative candidates. The lawsuit claims Colorado’s donation limits violate the First Amendment by limiting donors’ freedom of speech. Donor Privacy People United for Privacy: A Lesson from the Trump Shooting: Stop Giving Extremists Roadmaps for Violence By Luke Wachob .....Yet, there is another front that must be engaged to beat back the threat of political violence: We must stop handing extremists roadmaps for their violence. Here’s what I mean. In an earlier era, Congress and state governments sought to battle political corruption by requiring campaigns to publish information about their financial supporters. As a result, an American who gives $200 to the Trump or Biden campaigns today will have their name, home address, and occupation or employer publicly disclosed in a permanent, online database. If they use a service like ActBlue or WinRed to make their donation, a gift of any size – even $1 – triggers the same exposure. That’s not all. For over a decade, Democrats in Congress have pushed for legislation that would force many advocacy nonprofits – groups like the ACLU, NRA, Planned Parenthood, and Moms for Liberty – to publicly disclose their supporters as well. In the states, disgruntled former politicians have pushed ballot initiatives to make it harder for nonprofits to speak about elections and policy issues without revealing their members’ and supporters’ names and addresses... Donor disclosure reinforces a worldview where people are defined first and foremost by their political beliefs and associations. That dehumanizing, toxic attitude is at the core of many of our current maladies. As former First Lady Melania Trump noted in a public statement, the shooter who took aim at the former president “recognized my husband as an inhuman political machine… the core facets of my husband’s life – his human side – were buried below the political machine.” The Courts National Review: Mr. President, If You Want to Mend Our Political Divide, End Lawfare By Andrew C. McCarthy .....Lawfare is the criminalization of policy differences and partisan rivalries. As such, it is another iteration of the same pathology Biden condemned in his Oval Office remarks: the abuse of power that catalyzes political violence. A stable republic settles its differences in its democratic processes — debates by its elected representatives and fair elections. In an unstable nation, the ruling regime uses its control of prosecutorial power to imprison and harass opponents and dissenters. The objective is not just to suppress but to vilify political opponents — to portray them as treasonous, if not inhuman, and as an existential threat to the society. This is the same abomination that inspires political violence. Free Expression City Journal: Edge of the Abyss By Heather Mac Donald .....Two things can be true: highly emotional rhetoric can be a but-for cause of political violence, and it is usually inappropriate to hold speakers of such rhetoric responsible for political violence committed by an unrelated actor. Several other things are also true: what one side of a political divide regards as patently dangerous rhetoric the other side will view as simple truth. And when the perpetrators of violence and the perpetrators of political hyperbole change sides, the assignment of fault will, too. The Atlantic: How Liberal College Campuses Benefit Conservative Students By Lauren A. Wright .....Right-wing commentators relish painting elite college students as ignorant, weak, and unprepared to meet the real world. Students have bolstered this perception by struggling to articulate positions on issues for which they profess deep concern. But this grim picture leaves out an important distinction: Conservative students, rather than being coddled, face significant intellectual and social challenges in college. These challenges impart educational advantages by forcing conservatives to defend their points of view. Liberal students, surrounded by like-minded peers and mentors, have less opportunity to grow in this way. Archive.today link Online Speech Platforms Washington Post (Tech Brief): What Trump VP pick J.D. Vance means for Silicon Valley By Cristiano Lima-Strong .....Like many Republican officials, Vance has bashed social media companies over allegations they disproportionately censor conservative viewpoints, and he has called for curtailing Section 230 — the legal shield that protects tech companies from lawsuits over user content. Vance has taken the argument against that shield a step further, joining Democratic and Republican tech critics alike in urging federal negotiators to stop including liability protections similar to Section 230 in U.S. trade agreements with foreign governments. Vance is also one of the dozens of senators supporting a major Senate bill aimed at increasing safeguards for children on tech platforms, known as the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA). But his views on competition issues have made him stand out from other contenders Trump considered for the vice-presidential nod, conservative activists and former GOP officials said. As a Senate candidate, Vance backed efforts to break up the tech giants and co-authored a legal brief calling for Google to be treated as a public utility — an aggressive approach that has gained traction in conservative legal circles. Cato: Artificial Intelligence Regulation Threatens Free Expression By David Inserra .....Perhaps the greatest panic over AI is about its expressive and informational elements and how these can be used to advance speech and viewpoints designated as harmful. The World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report listed AI-powered misinformation and disinformation as the most severe threat to the world in the next two years. Even in the long term, this report rates AI-powered misinformation and “adverse outcomes of AI technologies” as the fifth- and sixth-greatest risks, respectively. The report reached this conclusion based on the input of “1,490 experts across academia, business, government, the international community and civil society.” Elites and experts are truly worried about the power of AI and online speech… To protect Americans’ right to free expression, policymakers should not enact precautionary regulations that stifle the development of AI without clear proof of their risk of harm. Furthermore, policymakers should reject efforts to control the ethics and norms around AI-powered expression. Instead, they should favor a robust market of AI tools that can serve as many users and perspectives as possible. The States Erie Reader: Anti-SLAPP Legislation Passes Unanimously in the PA State Senate .....The anti-SLAPP bill recently passed unanimously in the Pennsylvania State Senate and now heads to Governor Shapiro's desk for approval. The Erie Reader and former contributing editor Jim Wertz are currently in the midst of a lawsuit of this nature, perpetuated by State Senator Dan Laughlin, in an attempt to silence the Reader's First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of the press. In a twist of irony, Senator Laughlin was one of the unanimous group to vote in favor of the anti-SLAPP legislation. If this bill becomes law, it will be precisely the type of lawsuit that Senator Laughlin is currently waging against the Erie Reader and Jim Wertz that will be prevented. 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