Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech November 5, 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 New Hampshire Union Leader via Yahoo News: Bow schools ask to present evidence first in in 'pink wristband' lawsuit hearing By Paul Feely .....Attorneys for the defense in a First Amendment lawsuit filed against the Bow School District have filed a motion asking they be allowed to present their evidence first at a hearing on the matter scheduled for later this month. Attorneys for Bow schools are also asking a judge to take notice of findings in a separate lawsuit brought by families of two New Hampshire public high school students, challenging a new state law banning transgender girls in grades 5-12 from participating in school sports. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit — three parents and a grandparent — claim their rights were violated when they were barred from school grounds over their silent protest of a transgender athlete playing in a girls soccer game. Attorneys from the Institute for Free Speech and attorney Richard J. Lehmann filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Concord in September on behalf of Kyle Fellers, Anthony "Andy" Foote, Nicole Foote and Eldon Rash. Link to original. Supreme Court Bloomberg Law: RFK Jr. Anti-Vaccine Group Asks Supreme Court to Protect Doctors By Lydia Wheeler .....Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s anti-vaccine group, which spreads misinformation about Covid-19 shots, wants the US Supreme Court to stop Washington officials from investigating and prosecuting physicians in the state for sharing their views on the virus. In an emergency application directed to Justice Elena Kagan on Monday, Children’s Health Defense joined doctors in asking for an injunction against Washington Attorney General Robert Ferguson and Kyle Karinen, executive director of the state’s medical commission. The activist group said Washington physicians are being investigated and sanctioned for expressing public views on Covid-19 that diverge from prevailing orthodoxy in violation of their First Amendment right to free speech. Kagan was asked to refer the matter to the entire court so “that it can reiterate the bedrock First Amendment principle that the viewpoint public/soapbox speech of physicians, and the public’s right to hear that speech, is accorded ‘robust’ protection by the First Amendment.” The Courts New York Times: Judge Refuses to Stop Musk’s $1 Million Giveaway By Theodore Schleifer .....A Pennsylvania judge handed Elon Musk a legal victory on Monday, refusing to halt Mr. Musk’s election sweepstakes, in which registered voters who signed a petition to support the Constitution were entered into a drawing to win $1 million. Judge Angelo Foglietta of the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas denied a request from Philadelphia’s district attorney, Larry Krasner, to issue an emergency injunction against Mr. Musk and put an immediate end to the giveaways. Congress Roll Call: As dark money floods campaign, advocates hope Harris, Dems could push changes By Victor Feldman .....National advocates for tighter campaign finance laws are expressing cautious optimism that, if elected, Vice President Kamala Harris will make the issue a top priority, even as “dark money” groups spend millions boosting her campaign. But, winning the White House won’t be enough. To get a shot at enacting even modest campaign finance and disclosure changes, Democrats will also need to sweep control of both chambers in November, according to leaders at watchdog groups that track the influence of money in federal elections... Meanwhile, leaders at other government watchdog groups are taking comfort in remarks from Democratic congressional leaders. In recent weeks, Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer and House Minority Whip Katherine M. Clark, D-Mass., have told reporters their party plans to make passing a sweeping election integrity and campaign finance bill dubbed the “Freedom to Vote Act” by its supporters one of its first priorities next Congress. Doing so might require changing the Senate’s filibuster floor procedures, however. “I think we have every indication that getting big secret money out of politics while simultaneously passing pro-voter reforms will continue to be a top priority, should there be a pro-reform trifecta next year,” Aaron Scherb, the senior director of legislative affairs at Common Cause, said... Others say Harris would be wise to put pressure on the FEC to more proactively enforce the campaign finance rules already on the books. “It’s an independent agency, it would not answer to her [Harris] in the same way as other parts of the executive branch, but I think she could still use her bully pulpit to really call on the Commission to vigorously enforce the law,” [the Brennan Center's Daniel Weiner] said. Candidates and Campaigns Politico: A pragmatist with a pugnacious streak: How Kamala Harris’ legal philosophy could shape her presidency By Betsy Woodruff Swan .....Two episodes in particular show how Harris adopted a restrictive view of the First Amendment while embracing bold prosecutorial strategies to address what she saw as social ills. In 2015, as California attorney general, Harris co-sponsored legislation that required anti-abortion pregnancy centers to notify their patients about California’s free or low-cost abortion and contraception resources, along with a phone number to call for more information. At the time, some people in the governor’s office and the legislature worried that the law might not survive a First Amendment challenge, according to Morain, the Harris biographer who covered California politics for the Sacramento Bee and Los Angeles Times. But the state moved forward with the bill, and Harris’ office enforced it. The anti-abortion centers sued, arguing the law violated their First Amendment rights because it required them to post messages they did not want to. The Supreme Court eventually sided with them, striking down the law. The state was required to pay them $2 million in legal fees. Reason: Trump's Legal Complaints Against 2 News Outlets Reflect His Disregard for Freedom of the Press By Jacob Sullum .....In two complaints filed last week, Donald Trump contends that CBS and The Washington Post broke the law by covering the presidential election in ways he did not like. His arguments, which seek to punish the news outlets for constitutionally protected activity via legal theories that are fanciful at best, are consistent with Trump's long history of disregarding the First Amendment by treating speech that offends him as grounds for civil damages, regulatory sanctions, or even incarceration. Slate: The Dark Reason More Young People Aren’t Running for Office By Shirin Ali .....Averie Bishop, a 28-year-old law school graduate running as a Democrat for the Texas House in a district that encompasses part of Dallas, echoed that sentiment. At first, Bishop said, she thought her age would be the biggest hindrance to her candidacy, but she found that people were open to hearing her out and could sense her passion. What’s been a profoundly bigger challenge has been the cost of running a political campaign. “I have been running for office for the past year, and learning what I know now, I am so disenchanted by the bureaucracy of politics,” Bishop said. In Texas, there are no campaign contribution limits for state House races. So despite her rising profile—Bishop was winner of the 2022 Miss Texas pageant and has a gigantic following on TikTok—she is still working full time as a technology consultant. Her campaign salary couldn’t cover the costs of running for office. Online Speech Platforms Axios: Scoop: Meta to extend block on new election ads By Sara Fischer .....Meta will extend its ban on new election ads for the week leading up to the election until several days after the polls close, Axios has learned. The tech giant informed advertising partners about the shift on Monday. The ban on new political ads was initially supposed to expire at 11:59 p.m. PT on Election Day, but Meta is extending the ban to prevent any confusion or misinformation from spreading while votes are still likely being counted. Meta instituted its policy of blocking new political ads from running in the week leading up to Election Day during the last presidential cycle, arguing there may not be enough time for candidates to contest new claims made in ads during the final week of the campaign. The Hill: Musk’s political posts viewed twice as many times as political ads on X: Analysis By Julia Shapero .....Elon Musk’s political posts on X have received more than twice as many views as paid political ads on his platform, according to a new analysis conducted by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). Forbes: The Battle Over How Much Politics To Allow On TikTok By Emily Baker-White .....So far, proponents of changing TikTok’s prohibition on political ads have not won out. The platform still prohibits people from placing paid political ads on its platform as it has since 2019, spokesperson Ben Rathe told Forbes. But just because the platform doesn’t accept money for political ads doesn’t mean TikTok users don’t see them: TikTok accounts run by candidates, parties, and advocacy groups routinely post short videos on the platform that are running as ads on TV and other social platforms. The posts aren’t posted as ads on TikTok — the candidates, campaigns, and advocates aren’t paying TikTok for their distribution; instead, the posts are so-called “organic,” and their reach is determined by engagement and other factors considered by the opaque TikTok algorithm... In 2024, the company also changed its approach to ads depicting victims of war. While it had previously banned such imagery in ads, it relaxed its policies to allow for humanitarian campaigns. "Advocating for stopping wars and armed conflict, and raising awareness of war victims, may be allowed as long as the ad content does not violate our ad policies, including depictions of real war scenes," its policies now say. 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