October 10, 2024

In the News

Florida Today: Brevard Moms for Liberty chapter gets win in school board case

By Jim Saunders

.....A federal appeals court Tuesday backed a chapter of the group Moms for Liberty in a constitutional challenge to Brevard County School Board policies that placed restrictions on speakers at board meetings.

A panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said policies targeted at “abusive,” “obscene” and “personally directed” speech violated the First Amendment. The panel overturned a decision by U.S. District Judge Roy Dalton.

“For many parents, school board meetings are the front lines of the most meaningful part of local government — the education of their children,” said Tuesday’s opinion, written by Judge Britt Grant and joined fully by Judge Barbara Lagoa and partly by Judge Charles Wilson. “And sometimes speaking at these meetings is the primary way parents interact with their local leaders or communicate with other community members. No one could reasonably argue that this right is unlimited, but neither is the government’s authority to restrict it.”

Nashville Banner: Attorneys Across the Political Spectrum Alarmed by Supreme Court Case On Fees

By Connor Daryani

.....On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a case out of Virginia that civil rights attorneys in Tennessee across the political spectrum say could have drastic consequences on their ability to litigate civil rights cases... 

At a time when civil rights lawsuits were popping up left and right, multiple civil rights attorneys in town told the Banner that [in Lackey v. Stinnie,] a ruling in Virginia’s favor could drastically hinder the ability of people to bring civil rights cases against the government…

The Southeastern Legal Foundation has filed an amicus briefing in opposition to Virginia in the case, along with the Cato Institute, the National Rifle Association and the Institute for Free Speech, which have all had cases that would have been affected by a ruling in Virginia’s favor. 

New from the Institute for Free Speech

Free Speech Arguments – Can States Ban Political Spending by U.S. Companies with Minor Foreign Ownership? (Central Maine Power Company)

.....Central Maine Power Company, et al. v. Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices, et al., argued before Circuit Judge Lara Montecalvo, Senior Circuit Judge Jeffrey R. Howard, and Circuit Judge Seth Aframe in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on October 9, 2024. Argued by Jonathan Richard Bolton, Maine Assistant Attorney General (on behalf of the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices, et al.), Joshua D. Dunlap (on behalf of Central Maine Power Company, et al.), Paul McDonald (on behalf of Versant Power and ENMAX Corporation), and Timothy Woodcock (on behalf of individual voter plaintiffs).

The Courts

Courthouse News: Limiting foreign spending via ballot questions may violate free speech, First Circuit suggests

By Thomas F. Harrison

.....A state ballot initiative making it illegal for foreign governments to influence state ballot initiatives might run afoul of the First Amendment, a First Circuit panel worried at oral argument Wednesday.

It’s illegal under federal law for foreign governments to spend money supporting U.S. political candidates — but there’s no such rule for ballot questions. In late 2023, Maine voters approved a ballot question extending that rule to ballot questions, but four months later a judge issued a preliminary injunction on it, blocking the rule as unconstitutional.

On appeal, the three-judge appeals panel honed in on a provision of the Maine rule that says it applies to corporations that have as little as 5% foreign ownership, suggesting that it might be too broad.

“What troubles me is your brief goes to a lot of effort to persuade us that 5% is a foreign speech problem,” U.S. Circuit Judge Seth Aframe told Maine’s lawyer, Jonathan Bolton. “Not likely or often, but it’s possible. And if we adopt ‘possible’ [as the test], a lot of speech is left on the table, and that strikes me as a problem.”

Congress

Fox News: Biden-Harris admin ‘taking advice from foreign governments’ on policing speech, lawmaker charges

By Fred Lucas

.....A newly released tranche of documents shows senior Biden-Harris administration officials gained pointers from British "disinformation" officials about partnering with social media companies and establishing an all-of-government effort for fighting disfavored content that includes elections and COVID-19…

The document release comes shortly after Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., chair of the House Oversight Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government Innovation, wrote President Biden and Vice President Harris to request information on suppression campaigns the administration might be engaged in regarding political speech.

Mace is also pushing free speech abroad. Last week, she introduced the No Funds for Fascists Act, a proposal to prohibit taxpayer funds from assisting foreign governments that abridge free speech and bars aid to governments that coerce social media platforms or news outlets to block speech.

The NSC meeting with the British unit was "over-the-top," Mace said.

"The Biden-Harris administration is so desperate to control speech and information they’re actually taking advice from foreign governments on how to violate our core constitutional rights," Mace said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "It’s extreme, over-the-top, and un-American. We introduced our ‘No Funds for Fascists’ bill in response to this."

Freedom of the Press Foundation: Anti-speech lawmakers continue targeting nonprofits

By Seth Stern

.....For months now, pandering U.S. lawmakers have their sights set on silencing nonprofit organizations — potentially including media outlets and press freedom groups.

They haven’t gotten their way yet but the fight’s not over. Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) has repeatedly joined plenty of other organizations to publicly shame these anti-speech officials for their cynical attempts to weaponize the IRS against opinions they don’t like.

Earlier this year, the House passed a bill that would allow the secretary of the Treasury to revoke nonprofits’ tax-exempt status, without due process and using secret evidence, by deeming them supporters of terrorists.

We wrote for The Intercept last spring about the implications for nonprofit media, especially in light of recent letters from lawmakers baselessly accusing outlets that are critical of Israel of supporting terror. Others wrote about the potential for the powers contemplated by the bill to be abused against environmental organizations, student groups, and others.

Online Speech Platforms

Washington Post: X is back online in Brazil, but it’s still a defeat for Musk

By Terrence McCoy and Marina Dias

.....A Brazilian Supreme Court justice lifted the suspension Tuesday evening on the social media platform X after the company met all of the court’s demands, ending a months-long dispute over the limits of freedom of expression in an era characterized by disinformation and polarization.

The States

The Texan: Texas House Committee Holds Interim Hearing On Reforming Anti-SLAPP Law

By Matt Stringer

.....The Texas House Committee on the Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence held an interim hearing last week that revisited an ongoing disagreement over how to go about reforming a state law designed to prevent lawsuits from being used to burden free speech, with the goal of producing a bill for the next legislative session. 

The law, known as the Texas Citizen Participation Act (TCPA), is designed to protect defendants in civil litigation against abusive litigation known as strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP), filed simply to bury a defendant in costly litigation. 

The TCPA, which was enacted in 2011, is considered one of the strongest of the anti-SLAPP laws in the nation. 

However, one wing of the legal community is concerned the law was written in an overly broad manner that can be exploited to shut down legitimate litigation that has nothing to do with free speech, causing litigants years of delay and millions in court costs. 

Rep. Jeff Leach (R-Plano), who chairs the committee, described the law’s abuse as turning from its intended purpose as a shield to a sword during the Thursday hearing. 

Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): State Threatens Media with Criminal Punishment for Spreading Supposed Health-Related Disinformation

By Eugene Volokh

.....From a letter sent by the Florida Department of Health General Counsel to a television station about this ad that supports Florida's Amendment 4: