Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech January 31, 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 Minding the Campus: Cornell’s Ban on Campaigning Undermines Free Speech By David Keating .....Cornell University’s rules for trustee elections include a startling provision: candidates are prohibited from campaigning. This isn’t a narrow restriction on certain campaign activities. It’s a comprehensive ban on virtually all communication about one’s candidacy. These restrictions seem particularly out of place at an institution that declared 2023-24 its “Year of Free Expression.” The disconnect between this symbolic gesture and the actual suppression of campaign speech could not be more dramatic. Under these rules, candidates cannot communicate about their candidacy through any medium, whether it’s traditional media, digital platforms, or even personal conversations with other graduates. Even more troubling is that alumni are prohibited from asking candidates questions about their positions on university issues. The Courts Courthouse News: Ninth Circuit blocks California law protecting kids from social media addiction By Matt Simons .....The Ninth Circuit granted an injunction Tuesday preventing the California attorney general’s office from enforcing a new child safety social media law that critics claim violates the First Amendment. Senate Bill 976, also known as the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act, prevents social media platforms from knowingly providing an addictive feed to minors without parental consent. The law, passed in September, will no longer take effect on Feb. 1, as previously planned. In a brief 2-page order, U.S. Circuit Judges Richard Paez, a Bill Clinton appointee, Jay Bybee, a George W. Bush appointee, and Eric D. Miller, a Donald Trump appointee, granted the injunction to NetChoice, a powerful tech lobbying group that sued the Golden State in a bid to thwart the law. Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): Harvard Crimson Was Entitled to Ban Commenter for What He Claims Were "Anti-Zionist" Comments By Eugene Volokh .....From today's decision by Judge Angel Kelley (D. Mass.) in Affleck v. Harvard Crimson Inc.: FEC Wiley: FEC Raises Individual Federal Contribution Limits for 2025-2026 Election Cycle By D. Mark Renaud .....As published in the Federal Register on January 30, 2025, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has followed the statutory dictates and raised the federal individual contribution limits to account for inflation. The new contribution limits are as follows: • Individual contribution limit to federal candidates, per election: Raised from $3,300 to $3,500 • Individual contributions to the main account of a national political party committee, per calendar year: Raised from $41,300 to $44,300. FCC New York Times: F.C.C. Chair Orders Investigation Into NPR and PBS Sponsorships By Benjamin Mullin and David McCabe .....The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission has waded into the politicized debate over NPR and PBS, ordering up an investigation that he said could be relevant in lawmakers’ decision about whether to continue funding the public news organizations. Brendan Carr, the chairman, said in a letter to NPR and PBS on Wednesday that the inquiry would focus on whether the news organizations’ member stations violated government rules by recognizing financial sponsors on the air. Mr. Carr said that NPR and PBS stations operate as noncommercial broadcast organizations, but that they may be airing “announcements that cross the line into prohibited commercial advertisements.” “To the extent that these taxpayer dollars are being used to support a for-profit endeavor or an entity that is airing commercial advertisements,” Mr. Carr wrote, “then that would further undermine any case for continuing to fund NPR and PBS with taxpayer dollars.” Congress New York Times: Patel Denies His List of 60 Names Is an ‘Enemies List’ By Adam Goldman .....In his book “Government Gangsters,” Mr. Patel made clear his hostility toward the so-called deep state, publishing a list of 60 names in an appendix. It has been widely interpreted as an enemies list and singles out former executive branch officials but is by no means “comprehensive,” according to Mr. Patel. At his confirmation hearing to be F.B.I. director on Thursday, Mr. Patel forcefully rejected the idea that the group of names was an enemies list. “It’s not an enemies list,” Mr. Patel told the senators. “It’s a total mischaracterization.”He later added that the F.B.I. “will not go backwards. There will be no politicization at the F.B.I. There will be no retributive actions taken by any F.B.I. should I be confirmed as F.B.I. director.” Trump Administration City Journal: How Trump Should Address Bias in Artificial Intelligence By David Rozado .....Last Tuesday, President Trump announced plans for billions of dollars in private-sector investment to strengthen artificial intelligence infrastructure in the United States. The initiative underscores his commitment to maintaining American leadership in AI research and industrial innovation. The Trump administration still faces many pressing questions about how to navigate the expanding influence of artificial intelligence. Chief among them: Are large language models (LLMs)—from OpenAI’s ChatGPT to Google’s Gemini—politically biased? A growing body of research suggests that they lean left. In my own studies, I have found that LLMs are more likely to use terminology favored by Democratic lawmakers, propose left-leaning policy solutions, and use more favorable language when discussing left-leaning public figures compared with their counterparts on the right. Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): Trump "Global Gag Rule" as to Abortion Likely Doesn't Violate the First Amendment By Eugene Volokh .....Friday, President Trump reinstated his 2017 reinstatement of the 2001 President G.W. Bush reinstatement of President Reagan's "Mexico City Policy" (also called by some the "Global Gag Rule") which provides, in relevant part: Candidates and Campaigns Communications Psychology: Warning people that they are being microtargeted fails to eliminate persuasive advantage By Fabio Carrella, Almog Simchon, Matthew Edwards & Stephan Lewandowsky .....The practice of microtargeting in politics, involving tailoring persuasive messages to individuals based on personal vulnerabilities, has raised manipulation concerns. As microtargeting’s persuasive benefits are well-established and its use facilitated by AI tools and personality-inference models, ethical and regulatory concerns are magnified. Here, we explore countering microtargeting effects by creating a warning signal deployed when users encounter personality-tailored political ads. Three studies evaluated the effectiveness of warning “popups” against potential microtargeting by comparing persuasiveness of targeted vs. non-targeted messages with and without popups. Using within subject-designs, Studies 1 (N = 666), 2a (N = 432), and 2b (N = 669) reveal a targeting effect, with targeted ads deemed more persuasive than non-targeted ones. More important, the presence of a warning popup had no meaningful impact on persuasiveness. Overall, across the three studies, personality-targeted ads were significantly more persuasive than non-targeted ones, and this advantage persisted despite warnings. Given the focus on transparency in initiatives like the EU’s AI Act, our finding that warnings have little effect has potential policy implications. Online Speech Platforms Fox News: TikTok suppressed content critical of Trump and 2020 election controversy, exclusive report alleges By Rich Edson .....As the Trump administration works to keep TikTok legally available in the United States, the wildly popular app has suppressed content critical of President Donald Trump, according to a new report shared exclusively with Fox News. TikTok maintains the report has reached a false conclusion, and that the researchers used terms subjected to additional safety measures because they’ve been associated with election misinformation or profanity. The report, from the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) at Rutgers University, contained findings that "highlight TikTok's ability to act as a powerful influence tool, adaptable to partisan politics, but with no inherent incentive for transparency or accountability." The States AZ Mirror: Republicans advance strict online porn age verification bill amid privacy concerns By Jerod MacDonald-Evoy .....A Republican-backed proposal to require Arizonans to prove they are at least 18 years old before accessing online pornography moved forward Wednesday morning. That verification could be done either by submitting a government-issued ID to the website operator or using an age-verification system that relies on private “transactional data.” The bill, run by freshman Republican lawmaker Nick Kupper, R-Surprise, is similar to legislation Republicans have pushed in previous years that failed to gain support due to constitutional concerns. Broadcast Law Blog: Washington State Court of Appeals Upholds $24.6 Million Penalty Against Meta for Not Meeting State Political Advertising Disclosure Requirements – A Warning to All Media Companies to Assess and Comply with State Political Disclosure Rules By David Oxenford .....In a December decision seemingly overlooked by much of the trade press, the Washington State Court of Appeals upheld a decision fining Facebook parent company Meta $24.6 million for its failure to comply with the extensive political disclosure rules adopted by that state. This decision upheld a summary judgement by a state trial court finding Meta liable for a $24.6 million penalty for violating the state’s public disclosure rules that apply to political advertising (for more on the trial court decision, see our article here). This decision was one of the first that we have encountered where a state imposed significant fines on a digital media company for not providing details of political advertising run on its system (though, as noted below, we are seeing more use of these state laws across the country). Nonprofit Law Prof Blog: Indiana Governor's Executive Order Targets Nonprofit Hospitals By Darryll K. Jones .....I told you about a week or ten days ago that the annual 12-month nonprofit hunting season is underway. In Indiana, there is a bill pending that would revoke nonprofit status for hospitals that charge more than the 200% of the Medicare reimbursement rate. The nonprofit hospital community is understandably aghast at the proposal. Here is an excerpt from Inside Indiana Business: 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