Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech February 7, 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 Freedom of the Press Foundation: Let all journalists cover Utah statehouse .....Lawmakers in Utah are facing a new First Amendment lawsuit after denying longtime Utah journalist Bryan Schott press credentials to cover the statehouse. Represented by the Institute for Free Speech, Schott and his news outlet Utah Political Watch claim that the move is retaliation for his critical coverage of state lawmakers. The Western Journal: Federal Elections Chief Refuses to Leave After Trump Fires Her, Vows to Dig In and Cause 'Trouble' By C. Douglas Golden .....[A]s Tiffany Donnelly at the Institute for Free Speech noted, Weintraub’s case represents an outlier. FEC commissioners are supposed to serve six-year terms. Weintraub was appointed by then-President George W. Bush, which would have meant her term would have ended long ago — no matter when during his presidency she was appointed. As it turns out, that term ended during Bush’s presidency: April 30, 2007, since she was appointed in 2002. “But Weintraub never left the FEC. Over 22 years after being appointed and 17 years after her term expired, Ellen Weintraub still serves as an FEC Commissioner,” Donnelly wrote. “By statute, FEC commissioners are supposed to be limited to one six-year term. They are permitted to stay in office as ‘acting’ commissioners until their successor is appointed. “No one ever thought, however, that ‘acting’ could mean ‘over two decades.’” FEC New York Times: Federal Election Commission Chair Says Trump Has Moved to Fire Her By Chris Cameron .....Ellen L. Weintraub, the chairwoman of the Federal Election Commission, said on Thursday that President Trump had moved to fire her. Ms. Weintraub, who has served as a Democratic commissioner on the bipartisan panel since 2002, posted a short letter signed by Mr. Trump on social media that said she was “hereby removed” from the commission effective immediately. She said in an interview that she did not see the president’s move as legally valid, and that she was considering her options on how to respond. “There’s a perfectly legal way for him to replace me,” Ms. Weintraub said on Thursday evening. “But just flat-out firing me, that is not it.” The Courts Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): "Title VI Must Be Applied Consistent with First Amendment Principles" By Eugene Volokh .....An excerpt from Judge John Cronan's long decision today in Gartenberg v. Cooper Union (S.D.N.Y.) (I expect to blog more later about other facets of the case [UPDATE: see this post]); note that the court's logic applies to Title VII liability in workplaces as well, especially since it cites precedents and articles that focus on Title VII: Cincinnati Enquirer: Springfield sues neo-Nazi group that unleashed 'torrent' of hate over Haitian immigrants By Dan Horn .... The city of Springfield, Ohio, sued a neo-Nazi group known as the Blood Tribe on Thursday, accusing its members of harassing residents who defended the city’s Haitian immigrant population last year against false claims and racial slurs. The federal lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Dayton, claims the Blood Tribe launched an expansive campaign that used emails, social media and physical intimidation to silence elected officials and private citizens who spoke out on behalf of the Haitians… While most speech is protected by the First Amendment, Springfield’s lawsuit argues members of the Blood Tribe repeatedly crossed the line from protected speech to intimidation that was so extreme it violated the civil rights of their targets. Candidates and Campaigns AP News: Altered image of Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate in new ad raises ethics concerns By Scott Bauer .....A new television attack ad in Wisconsin’s hotly contested Supreme Court race features a doctored image of the liberal candidate, a move that her campaign claims could be a violation of a recently enacted state law... The Schimel campaign ad begins and ends with a black-and-white image of Crawford with her lips closed together. A nearly identical color image from her 2018 run for Dane County Circuit Court shows Crawford with a wide smile on her face. Crawford’s campaign accused Schimel of manipulating the image, potentially in violation of a state law enacted last year. The law, passed with bipartisan support in the Legislature and signed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, requires disclosure if political ads use audio or video content created by generative artificial intelligence. Failure to disclose the use of AI as required can result in a $1,000 fine. Minnesota Reformer: A big pile of money wasn’t enough for Democrats to hold the Minnesota House By Christopher Ingraham and Michelle Griffith .....Minnesota House Democrats raised three times as much money as House Republicans in 2024, according to the latest batch of data from the Minnesota Campaign Finance Board. And it still wasn’t enough to keep their trifecta this past November. The States Argus Leader: South Dakota House restores ‘loan loophole’ bill back to original form, sends to governor By Joshua Haiar, South Dakota Searchlight .....A bill that would close a campaign finance loophole allowing unlimited funds into a campaign is headed to the governor’s desk... The state House of Representatives passed the bill 38-29 on Wednesday at the Capitol in Pierre. It would prevent the ability to make unlimited campaign donations as long as the donation is categorized as a loan. Reisch is the bill’s House sponsor. First, he successfully persuaded fellow lawmakers to strike an amendment added during the bill’s recent House committee hearing. It would have imposed a $10,000 cap on federal campaign transfers to state political committees. That amendment, introduced by Rep. Spencer Gosch, R-Glenham, was reintroduced by Reisch as a standalone bill. Reisch said it was necessary to strip Gosch’s amendment because it might violate South Dakota’s single-subject rule for legislation. “It’s better to be on the safe side than to risk having the entire bill thrown out,” Reisch said. South Dakota Searchlight: Lawmakers wave off caps on donations from inactive candidates By Joshua Haiar .....South Dakota legislators shot down a bill Wednesday that would have capped contributions from inactive candidates’ campaign committees to other political committees. Sen. Michael Rohl, R-Aberdeen, sponsored the bill. Current law allows former candidates to take in and distribute unlimited campaign funds, a “loophole” he said undermines fairness in campaign finance. “If I chose not to seek office in two years, I could keep this account open, and 15 years down the line, I could still be making donations to people, and I could still be putting money in,” Rohl said. “I don’t think that’s necessarily right.” The bill failed on a 9-3 vote in the House State Affairs Committee on Wednesday in Pierre. It would have capped annual donations from inactive candidate committees to statewide candidates at $4,000, donations from legislative or county candidates at $1,000, and from political parties and action committees at $10,000. Violations would have been misdemeanors. VTDigger: Senate bill would regulate use of ‘deepfakes’ in leadup to Vermont elections By Shaun Robinson .....Vermont could join close to two dozen other states this year in regulating how certain artificially-generated content, often called “deepfakes,” can be used online in the leadup to elections. But there are key questions for lawmakers over whether, or to what extent, the proposal could hinder people’s rights to free speech. A new bill sponsored by a tripartisan group of state senators, S.23, would require some people who publish “synthetic media” that makes it appear as though someone did or said something, even when they really didn’t, to also publish a disclosure that the media is fake. To be subject to the bill, a person would either have to know, or be in a position where they should have known, the media was misleading — and, critically, be planning to publish it within 90 days of a local, state or federal election. The bill would not actually prevent people from publishing fake content, no matter how convincing it is. But S.23 calls for fines, ranging from $1,000 for a first offense to up to $15,000 for repeat offenses, for failing to publish a disclosure when it’s required. EFF: Protecting Free Speech in Texas: We Need To Stop SB 336 By Joe Mullin .....Texas Senate Bill 336 (SB 336) is an attack on the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA), the state’s landmark anti-SLAPP law, passed in 2011 with overwhelming bipartisan support. If passed, SB 336 (or its identical companion bill, H.B. 2459) will weaken safeguards against abusive lawsuits that seek to silence peoples’ speech. 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