Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech January 28, 2025 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 Idaho Capital Sun: Idaho Senate widely passes anti-SLAPP bill that aims to curtail frivolous lawsuits By Kyle Pfannenstiel .....The Idaho Senate on Monday widely passed a bill intended to protect free speech by curtailing frivolous lawsuits. Sen. Brian Lenney, R-Nampa, has described the bill as an anti-SLAPP measure, targeting what are known as strategic lawsuits against public participation The bill — Senate Bill 1001 — would put lawsuits on hold if a party files an anti-SLAPP motion. The bill would let the winning party recover attorney fees. Idaho is one of 15 states without anti-SLAPP protections, Lenney said in the state Senate on Monday. “These are lawsuits that happen all over the United States that can take years to defend. And they can cost tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of dollars in legal fees for the defendant,” Lenney said. “Because the type of lawsuits this bill deals with are not designed to win. They’re designed to intimidate, to distract, to bankrupt or to punish a person for exercising free speech.” Anti-SLAPP laws are in place in 35 states and the District of Columbia, according to a 2023 report by the Institute for Free Speech. The Oklahoman: Oklahoma political campaigns face an urgent problem. Let’s fix it. By A.J. Ferate .....As a result of that right, there are two types of regulations. The type embraced by Oklahoma significantly restricts candidate and political party fundraising while letting independent groups operate unfettered and without fundraising limits. As a result, the independent groups often speak more than the candidates or the parties. This system makes no sense. Nearly a dozen states use a superior approach. These jurisdictions include Virginia, Texas, Pennsylvania, Nebraska and Utah. It allows candidates and parties to raise and spend unlimited funds while requiring prompt reporting so voters will know who is giving how much to what candidates. The task force recommended a model similar to the one operating in these states. And, while most states allow political parties to raise unlimited sums, Oklahoma ranked 42nd in the freedom to give to political parties in the most recent Institute for Free Speech ranking. Yet the Oklahoma Ethics Commission turned a blind eye to the task force recommendations to expand that freedom by allowing candidates and parties to raise and spend contributions without limits. Instead, Oklahoma remains frozen by antiquated paradigms. Allowing such contributions, when combined with the already robust transparency reporting requirements, will allow candidates and parties an equal right to speak to voters. Concord Monitor: ‘It sets a dangerous precedent,’: School officials defend Bow superintendent as legislation moves to remove her By Sruthi Gopalakrishnan .....Marcy Kelley, superintendent of Bow and Dunbarton’s school district, is standing up to a legislative effort calling for her removal over allegations that she suppressed parents’ free speech during a girls’ soccer game last fall. At the State House on Monday, Kelley called the resolution to oust her as a “serious threat” to the local control principle governing New Hampshire’s education systems… The resolution, sponsored by Mike Belcher, a Wakefield Republican stems from an incident at a September girls’ soccer match between Bow and Plymouth Regional High School that led to a lawsuit against the school... This issue is also part of an ongoing federal lawsuit filed by parents who wore pink armbands. The lawsuit alleges that their First Amendment rights to free speech and expression were stifled. The Courts ABC 4 News: Lawsuit claims SC race and gender education law suppresses free speech By Tatiana Carter .....A South Carolina law that restricts how race and gender are taught in public schools is being challenged in a lawsuit filed by the Legal Defense Fund, which argues that the law suppresses free speech and infringes on students’ right to learn. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the NAACP, South Carolina public school employees, and parents of students in the state's public school system, targets the state's budget proviso. This proviso, in effect since 2021, restricts school districts from using state Department of Education funds for lessons and materials related to racial inequality, discrimination, and systemic racism. The budget proviso has already resulted in the removal of books and lessons related to racial issues. Louisiana Illuminator: Trial begins in First Amendment against St. John president, council By Wesley Muller and Drew Costley .....Video of that council meeting was played in court Monday. It showed that when Banner tried to comment about the hiring of an attorney, Hotard interrupted her. “Stop this comment,” Hotard told Wright, who read a criminal statute out loud that prohibited the public disclosure of information from an ethics investigation. He told Banner a violation could be punished with a fine or imprisonment. After trying multiple times to continue her comment, Banner walked away from the podium. In his opening argument, Ike Spears, the lead attorney for Wright and Hotard, said the Banner sisters do their advocacy work for media attention and to become social media influencers. “Don’t encourage them,” Spears told the jury. Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown is presiding over the case in the U.S. Eastern District Court of Louisiana. Trump Administration CBS News: JD Vance says Big Tech has "too much power" By Kaia Hubbard .....Vice President JD Vance said Saturday that "we believe fundamentally that big tech does have too much power," despite the prominent positioning of tech CEOs at President Trump's inauguration last week. "They can either respect America's constitutional rights, they can stop engaging in censorship, and if they don't, you can be absolutely sure that Donald Trump's leadership is not going to look too kindly on them," Vance said on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan." Bloomberg Law: Trump 'Orwellian Trolling' on DEI Orders Invites Lawsuit Rematch By Chris Marr and Rebecca Klar .....President Donald Trump’s executive orders to purge federal workforce diversity programs and scrutinize corporate DEI efforts are primed for legal challenges using free speech and due process claims similar to those that thwarted his first-term ban on “divisive concepts” trainings. The new Trump orders are a broader attack on diversity, equity, and inclusion than his 2020 order, which restricted the topics federal agencies, the military, and federal contractors could cover in diversity training. It was partially blocked after LGBTQ+ aid groups sued, alleging it was overly vague and infringed on their freedom of speech and violated due process rights. Congress Washington Post (Tech Brief): Senators revive bill to ban kids under 13 from social media By Cristiano Lima-Strong .....A group of influential senators are renewing efforts to ban children under 13 from social media and prohibit platforms from targeting teens with personalized recommendations, a sweeping proposal that is poised to gain steam with Republicans in control of Congress. Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Tuesday are reintroducing the Kids Off Social Media Act, or KOSMA, one of several major proposals aimed at expanding protections for children online that has been vying to build up support on Capitol Hill. While the Senate passed a pair of separate measures to strengthen safety and privacy safeguards for children online last year, the push fell short amid opposition from tech industry groups and digital rights advocates who warned the bills could infringe on free speech. Free Expression The Dispatch: Baseless SLAPP Suits Threaten the Speech Rights of all Americans By Greg Lukianoff .....Efforts to prohibit purportedly false statements in politics are as old as the republic. Indeed, our First Amendment tradition originated from colonial officials’ early attempts to use libel laws against the press. America rejected this censorship after officials used the Sedition Act of 1798 to jail newspaper editors for publishing “false” and “malicious” criticisms of President John Adams. After Thomas Jefferson defeated Adams in the election of 1800, he pardoned and remitted the fines of those convicted, writing that he considered the act “to be a nullity, as absolute and as palpable as if Congress had ordered us to fall down and worship a golden image.” Trump’s allegations against Selzer are so baseless that you’d be forgiven for wondering why he even bothered. That is, until you realize that these claims are filed not because they have any merit or stand any chance of success, but in order to impose punishing litigation costs on his perceived opponents. The lawsuit is the punishment. The States Virginia Mercury: Senate panel kills controversial campus terrorism bill amid free speech concerns By Nathaniel Cline .....Legislation aimed at barring Virginia colleges and universities from engaging with terrorist groups or affiliates was struck down Monday by a Senate Education subcommittee, following heated debate over its potential impact on free speech and student activism. Sen. Bill Stanley, R-Franklin, introduced the bill in response to growing concern over terrorism cases nationwide. “I think what we’re trying to do is make sure that our learning environments are places to learn and not to have fear be a part of that,” Stanley said of his Senate Bill 1284. The proposal sought to prohibit terrorist organizations, countries or groups supporting terrorism, representatives of such groups, and individuals attempting to recruit for terrorist activities from operating on Virginia college campuses. However, the bill faced strong opposition from speakers who argued that its broad language could stifle free speech and unfairly target student groups, particularly those advocating for Palestinian rights. North Dakota Monitor: Voter registration, campaign finance reporting debated by North Dakota lawmakers By Mary Steurer .....House Bill 1286, also sponsored by Schatz, is meant to address the use of so-called “dark money.” Certain kinds of organizations can raise money to support political causes without reporting where the funding comes from... The bill proposes a complex system for reporting contributions to political committees, campaigns and ballot measures and for investigating possible violations. Anyone who spends more than $200 in an election cycle for a political purpose, with some exceptions, would be required to maintain paper trails detailing the “identity of each ultimate and true source” of that money. The bill would apply to 501c(4) organizations, or nonprofits that can use money for some political activity... The bill establishes that trying to evade these campaign reporting requirements is a class A misdemeanor. Deputy Secretary of State Sandy McMerty said it’s the opinion of the Secretary of State’s Office that the bill would be unconstitutional since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that 501c(4) organizations can contribute to political causes and keep their donors’ identities anonymous in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Clarion Ledger: This week in MS politics: Election-related bills coming up in MS Senate By Grant McLaughlin .....Election-related debates are slated to happen before Feb. 4 in the Mississippi Senate. Senate Elections Committee Chair Jeremy England, R-Vancleave, told the Clarion Ledger on Thursday he has filed several bills dealing with early voting, campaign finance filing and campaign finance law enforcement in Mississippi. England attempted to bring up those same topics during the 2024 session in one single piece of legislation, but its opponents cut out the bill's most impactful features. The measure later died on the Senate's calendar of bills. This year, England plans to push legislation to: …. Clarify state law to prevent out-of-state corporations from donating more than $1,000 to political campaigns per year. 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