Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech October 4, 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 Just the News: Parents sue school district for banning silent protest of transgender sports policy at games By Greg Piper .....Parents and a grandparent who silently protested male eligibility for girls' soccer, by wearing pink wristbands with the letters "XX" in reference to the female chromosome pair, sued a New Hampshire district, officials and even soccer referee, claiming retaliation against their speech, including a ban on stepping on any school property. Cato Daily Podcast: Buckeye v. IRS .....Ohio’s Buckeye Institute is challenging the IRS practice of collecting and storing information on major donors to American nonprofits. Buckeye president Robert Alt explains why the case matters. Ed. note: The Buckeye Institute is represented by attorneys at the Institute for Free Speech and its own attorneys. The Courts Reason: Minnesota 'Acting as a Ministry of Truth' With Anti-Deep Fake Law, Says Lawsuit By Elizabeth Nolan Brown .....A new lawsuit takes aim at a Minnesota law banning the "use of deep fake technology to influence an election." The measure—enacted in 2023 and amended this year—makes it a crime to share AI-generated content if a person "knows or acts with reckless disregard about whether the item being disseminated is a deep fake" and the sharing is done without the depicted individual's consent, intended to "injure a candidate or influence the result of an election," and either within 90 days before a political party nominating convention or after the start of the absentee voting period prior to a presidential nomination primary, any state or local primary, or a general election. Christopher Kohls, a content creator who goes by Mr. Reagan, and by Minnesota state Rep. Mary Franson (R–District 12B) argue that the law is an "impermissible and unreasonable restriction of protected speech." Bloomberg Law: Tech Group Netchoice Targets Tennessee Kids' Social Media Law By Tonya Riley .....Tech industry group NetChoice sued Tennessee to block a law that would require social media companies to verify the ages of minors using their platforms in the state. The Protecting Children from Social Media Act (HB 1891), enacted May 2, violates the First Amendment by conditioning Tennessee residents’ access to information online on giving up their personally identifiable information, according to a complaint filed Thursday in the US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. That mirrors arguments that NetChoice used in lawsuits challenging similar laws in other states. The Federalist: California AG Bonta Sued For ‘Chilling’ Protected Speech About Lifesaving Abortion Pill Reversal By Jordan Boyd .....California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s ongoing war against crisis pregnancy centers for offering women a scientifically-backed solution to reverse chemical abortions violates those centers’ constitutional rights, a new lawsuit alleges. In an Oct. 2 complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief, pregnancy center network National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) demanded the Western Division of California’s Central District Court halt Bonta’s attempt to criminalize advocacy of the lifesaving medication known to reverse chemical abortions because it infringes on its 136 California members’ First and Fourteenth Amendment right to “speak freely, to practice their religion, and to due process under the law.” Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): Insulting Anti-Gay Preaching at PrideFest Event May Have Been Protected by the First Amendment By Eugene Volokh .....From an order this Monday by Judge Kevin Castel (S.D.N.Y.) In Rusfeldt v. City of New York (just an excerpt of a long opinion): Bopp Law Firm: Victory for Indiana Right to Life as Court Bars Enforcement of Laws Prohibiting Corporate Contributions to Super PACs .....On Tuesday, a federal court prohibited enforcement of an Indiana law that, in violation of the First Amendment, limited corporate contributions to PACs for independent expenditures. This ruling represents a complete victory for Indiana Right to Life Victory Fund (“IRTL Victory Fund”) and for all who value the constitutional right to engage in political speech, which is at the core of the First Amendment. Reason: Nashville Attorney Sues Federal Judges Over Gag Order Barring Him From Talking About a Notorious Prison By C.J. Ciaramella .....For the past two years, a Nashville attorney hasn't been able to publicly talk about a private prison company he's sued multiple times for civil rights abuses. Now that attorney has filed a First Amendment lawsuit against a federal court district and four federal judges, arguing that gag order violated his own civil rights. Attorney Daniel Horwitz, represented by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian-leaning public interest law firm, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee and four district court judges, arguing that the local rule used to gag him violates his First Amendment rights as-applied and is unconstitutional on its face. Because of the gag order, Horwitz, says, he's been unable to publicly comment about deaths inside the prison. When the Department of Justice announced an investigation into conditions at the same facility this August, Horwitz had to turn down interview requests from media. Nonprofits Nonprofit Law Prof Blog: Leff on the Johnson Amendment and Safe Space By Darryl K. Jones .....Ben Leff has some interesting commentary in Tax Notes (subscription required) regarding the prohibition against campaign intervention and the SAFE SPACE petition for declaratory relief. His current piece elaborates on some ideas he shared earlier this year. Here is an excerpt: “As discussed earlier, the argument that the Johnson Amendment (or its current interpretation) violates constitutionally protected speech rights must be balanced against the government’s legitimate interest in the fairness and integrity of the campaign-finance system and the charitable sector. Challenges to the Johnson Amendment using a no-additional-expense theory, like SAFE SPACE’s, dramatically alter that balance. A court hearing the SAFE SPACE case might undervalue the government’s nonsubvention interest and repeal the Johnson Amendment or create an overly broad exception that fundamentally alters the campaign finance tax system, creating a loophole that would deeply distort and harm the nonprofit sector. So how should a charity’s right to make known its views on candidates be vindicated while preserving to the fullest extent possible the government’s interest in nonsubvention? I have a solution that vindicates the core speech rights of charities while simultaneously maximizing the government’s interest in nonsubvention.” Free Expression The Verge: College students used Meta’s smart glasses to dox people in real time By Victoria Song .....Two Harvard students have created an eerie demo of how smart glasses can use facial recognition tech to instantly dox people’s identities, phone numbers, and addresses. The most unsettling part is the demo uses current, widely available technology like the Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses and public databases. AnhPhu Nguyen, one of the two students, posted a video showcasing the tech in action that was then picked up by 404 Media. Dubbed I-XRAY, the tech works by using the Meta smart glasses’ ability to livestream video to Instagram. A computer program then monitors that stream and uses AI to identify faces. Those photos are then fed into public databases to find names, addresses, phone numbers, and even relatives. That information is then fed back through a phone app. Candidates and Campaigns Associated Press: Democratic donors prop up far-right candidates including Wisconsin gun activist in Senate race By Ryan J. Foley and Brian Slodysko .....David Steinglass, a wealthy donor, has supported scores of Democrats running for office and calls himself an activist for transgender rights. So his donation earlier this year to a far-right candidate in Wisconsin’s U.S. Senate race seemed wildly out of character. He gave the maximum $3,300 to help get a man on the ballot who had these items in his background: He was investigated in the plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, he is a gun rights activist and he has called for banning some gender-affirming treatments for minors. Far from an anomaly, the donation is part of a larger design. Steinglass’ contribution to “America First” candidate Thomas Leager, and thousands more he and his wife gave to other far-right independents in key congressional races, is supporting a plan to boost Democrats and siphon votes from Republicans, an Associated Press examination found. As the election cycle enters an urgent, final five weeks, both Democrats and Republicans are engaging in questionable tactics that threaten to subvert the democratic process by trying to shape the ballot through deceptive means. The States Columbus Dispatch: Householder scandal no excuse for suppressing free speech By Alex Baiocco .....There’s an old legal adage that “bad facts make bad law.” Continued efforts to spin the criminal misdeeds of Larry Householder, the convicted ex-Ohio House Speaker, to justify new restrictions on First Amendment rights are a perfect example. Last year, Democratic lawmakers in Ohio seized on the scandal to propose a broad crackdown on the speech and privacy rights of nonprofits and their supporters. While the so-called “Ohio Anti-Corruption Act” (H.B. 112) never gained traction in the Republican-dominated General Assembly, Republican lawmakers are now reportedly drafting their own proposal to force nonprofits to expose the names and addresses of their supporters. Though the sponsors of the forthcoming bill acknowledge the First Amendment may stand in the way of their goals, they remain willing to spend taxpayers’ money defending against inevitable constitutional challenges. As House Finance Committee Chair Jay Edwards, R-Nelsonville, put it, “You never know if something’s unconstitutional until you try to do it.” As is often the case with nonprofit donor exposure legislation, the primary backers have a personal interest in gaining access to organizations’ donor lists and chilling nonprofit speech. Rep. Sara Carruthers, R-Hamilton, with whom Edwards is drafting the proposal, was criticized in mailers paid for by an independent group with nonprofit backing. Daily Caller: Exclusive: Dem Gov Hosted Election Training Camp For Liberal Activist ‘Influencers’ Using Public Funds By Robert Schmad .....Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro used public funds to train dozens of overwhelmingly liberal social media influencers on how they can get their audience to vote in the 2024 election, according to documents obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation through a records request. Shapiro directed the commonwealth of Pennsylvania to pay thousands of dollars to host a day-long “Democracy Summer Camp” on July 25 to instruct people with large social media followings on how to get their audiences to vote and how to identify “misinformation” on the internet, according to the documents. The DCNF obtained a list of 43 influencers the governor’s office invited to attend the publicly-funded training and, upon review, none of the influencers favored Republicans and roughly 70% had an explicitly liberal social media presence. 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