Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech February 5, 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]. The Courts Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): FBI Agents File Class Action Challenging "Retaliatory Firing" By David Post .....While FBI agents may be at-will employees who can, generally speaking, be fired for "any reason or no reason," they can't be fired for an unconstitutional reason, or as punishment for the exercise of their constitutional rights (e.g. he can't fire all the African-American agents, or all the agents registered as Democrats). The Complaint, filed in DC District Court, is posted here… Three Counts of unlawful activity are alleged: (1) Violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution: Retaliation Based on Perceived Political Affiliation; (2) Violation of Plaintiffs' Substantive and Procedural Due Process Rights under the 5th Amendment; and (3) Violation of the Plaintiffs' Fifth Amendment Right to Privacy. Inside Radio: Justice Department Pulls Back Defense Of New FCC Employee Data Collection Rules. .....A federal appeals court in New Orleans is scheduled to hear arguments today (Feb. 4) in the challenge brought by several broadcasters to new rules requiring stations to provide employee data to the FCC. There may be less of a dispute, as the DOJ says it won’t defend portions of the order that conflict with Trump’s directive declaring there are only two genders. U.S. Attorney Robert Wiggers says that while the FCC is mandated by federal law to collect employee data from Form 395-B, revisions made with the forms are not supported by the Trump administration. That appears to offer a win to one of the points raised by religious broadcasters before the court hearing even begins. The Commission last February approved by a 3-2 vote along party lines the order (MB Docket No. 98-204) that reinstated the annual Form 395-B filing, which collects information about the racial and gender makeup of station employees. This decision also introduced two new racial categories and a “non-binary” gender option, along with the traditional male and female classifications. Religious broadcasters, in particular, have opposed these changes, claiming the inclusion of a non-binary category infringes on their First Amendment rights by forcing them to recognize genders beyond male and female. National Review: Teacher Booted from Classroom over Crucifix Sues District, Alleges Religious Discrimination By Ryan Mills .....A Connecticut middle school teacher who was booted from her classroom for refusing to take down a crucifix she’s long displayed near her desk has sued school district leaders, accusing them of violating her rights to free speech and religious expression. The lawsuit, filed on Thursday in U.S. District Court, accuses leaders of the Consolidated School District of New Britain of using the First Amendment’s establishment clause, which bars the government from establishing a religion, “as an excuse to abridge the free speech and religious free exercise rights” of teacher Marisol Arroyo-Castro. Trump Administration Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): May Aliens Be Deported Based on Their Speech? By Eugene Volokh .....Does this statutory scheme, and Executive actions to enforce it, violate the First Amendment? After all, the First Amendment generally protects endorsing or espousing violence. Americans are perfectly free, for instance, to say that it would be good if Putin were assassinated (either in Russia or when visiting, say, Belarus), that Israel should start taking Palestinians as hostages (even if doing so would be unlawful under American law), or that Palestinians were right to take Israeli hostages. The list of generally constitutionally protected speech that would be covered as "endors[ing] or espous[ing]" would be very long. Yet when it comes to aliens and immigration law, the First Amendment questions aren't settled. Here's my sense of the current rules, such as they are: Online Speech Platforms Guardian: WhatsApp says journalists and civil society members were targets of Israeli spyware By Stephanie Kirchgaessner .....Nearly 100 journalists and other members of civil society using WhatsApp, the popular messaging app owned by Meta, were targeted by spyware owned by Paragon Solutions, an Israeli maker of hacking software, the company alleged on Friday. The journalists and other civil society members were being alerted of a possible breach of their devices, with WhatsApp telling the Guardian it had “high confidence” that the 90 users in question had been targeted and “possibly compromised”. Washington Post: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance By Nitasha Tiku and Gerrit De Vynck .....Google on Tuesday updated its ethical guidelines around artificial intelligence, removing commitments not to apply the technology to weapons or surveillance. The company’s AI principles previously included a section listing four “Applications we will not pursue.” As recently as January 30 that included weapons, surveillance, technologies that “cause or are likely to cause overall harm,” and use cases contravening principles of international law and human rights, according to a copy hosted by the Internet Archive. In a blog post published Tuesday, Google’s head of AI Demis Hassabis and the company’s senior vice president for technology and society James Manyika said Google was updating its AI principles because the technology had become much more widespread, and because there was a need for companies based in democratic countries to serve government and national security clients. The States NBC Montana: Bipartisan bill preventing frivolous SLAPP lawsuits gets broad support By Josh Margolis .....On Tuesday, lawmakers were briefed on a bipartisan bill protecting people from being sued for utilizing their 1st Amendment rights. House Bill 292, introduced by a Democrat and a Republican, had its first hearing Tuesday in the House Judiciary Committee. It is designed to provide a legal remedy for individuals to be able to quickly dismiss frivolous lawsuits without having to go through the costly legal process. It accomplishes this by allowing for early filings of motions to dismiss with an expedited hearing and requiring the court to stay all other actions until they rule on the motion. If the dismissal is successful, the defendant will retain attorney fees and expenses, which proponents say will prevent frivolous lawsuits, commonly known as SLAPP lawsuits, that seek to stifle free speech. “HB 292 levels the playing field. It ensures that Montanans are not silenced by the fear of legal retaliation. Especially when they are acting in the public interest,” said State Rep. Tom Millett (R-Marion), the bill’s sponsor. “This is model uniform act legislation that will protect journalists and citizen activists from financially damaging lawsuits that seek to chill free speech rights,” said State Rep. James Reavis (D-Billings), the bill’s co-sponsor. Statesman Journal: State Republican leader seeks Oregon Food Bank audit over political activity By Dianne Lugo .....Some Oregon Republicans believe the Oregon Food Bank is too involved in political activity and want to create a new audit committee to review the organization's financial activity, but opponents say the bill unfairly targets a single nonprofit and could result in lawsuits. Senate Republican Leader Daniel Bonham from The Dalles and Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis, R-Albany, testified Tuesday in favor of their Senate Bill 644, which would create a joint committee to perform an audit of the Oregon Food Bank's financial transactions between Dec. 1, 2021, and Jan. 1, 2025. The committee also would provide a written report to the Legislature identifying and reporting on all financial transactions related to political activities by the nonprofit. Washington Post: Virginia House and Senate pass flurry of bills at session’s midpoint By Gregory S. Schneider and Laura Vozzella .....HB2165 and SB1002 would prohibit the use of campaign funds for personal expenses, something widely banned elsewhere but allowed in Virginia. The Senate version passed that chamber on a bipartisan 36-4 vote. The House bill passed 99 to 0. But the Senate let two other bills meant to rein in the state’s notoriously loose campaign finance laws die without floor votes. SB1050 would have banned corporate donations to political campaigns. SB1469 would have capped the amount of money one person can donate to individual candidates for governor ($5,000) or legislature ($3,000) — or their own campaigns ($400,000 for governor, $200,000 for legislature). There are no limits in Virginia, where Youngkin plowed $20 million of his personal fortune into his 2021 bid for governor. The Verge: California bill would make AI companies remind kids that chatbots aren’t people By Emma Roth .....A new bill proposed in California (SB 243) would require AI companies to periodically remind kids that a chatbot is an AI and not human. The bill, proposed by California Senator Steve Padilla, is meant to protect children from the “addictive, isolating, and influential aspects” of AI. In addition to limiting companies from using “addictive engagement patterns,” the bill would require AI companies to provide annual reports to the State Department of Health Care Services outlining how many times it detected suicidal ideation by kids using the platform, as well as the number of times a chatbot brought up the topic. It would also make companies tell users that their chatbots might not be appropriate for some kids. 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