Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech May 15, 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 Delaware Liberal: General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Wednesday, May 14, 2025 .....I particularly like SB 80 (Mantzavinos), which: “… protects the public’s right to engage in activities protected by the First Amendment without abusive, expensive legal retaliation. Specifically, the Act combats the problem of strategic lawsuits against public participation, also called ‘SLAPPs.’ A SLAPP may come in the form of a defamation, invasion of privacy, nuisance, or other claim, but its real goal is to entangle the defendant of a SLAPP in expensive litigation and stifle the ability to engage in constitutionally protected activities. While Delaware has an ‘anti-SLAPP’ law (see §§ 8136 through 8138 of Title 10 of the Delaware Code), the law received a score of ‘D-’ from the Institute for Free Speech due to limited types of speech it protects and lack of basic protections provided by the Act.” The Courts Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): First Amendment Challenge to Texas State University Speech Code Can Go Forward By Eugene Volokh .....From today's Fifth Circuit decision in Speech First, Inc. v. McCall, written by Judge James Ho and joined by Judges Kyle Duncan and Andrew Oldham: Courthouse News: Doctors take challenge to Washington’s Covid speech rules to Ninth Circuit By Monique Merrill .....A challenge to a Washington state investigation into doctors spreading Covid-19 misinformation reached a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel on Wednesday, where the judges questioned whether they even had the power to intervene. The Washington Medical Commission charged two doctors with unprofessional conduct for publishing false information about Covid-19 online and in newspaper columns in 2022 and 2023. Both doctors then sued commission officials and were joined in the lawsuit by an additional doctor, as well as former Utah Jazz point guard John Stockton and the nonprofit Children’s Health Defense, founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. A Washington state federal court rejected the plaintiffs’ First Amendment and due process challenges, finding the court was precluded from considering them under Younger v. Harris — a 1971 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that generally prevents federal courts from intervening in state proceedings, including state medical board investigations. Before the Ninth Circuit, the doctors argued that Younger abstention doesn’t apply. Politico: Judge orders release of Georgetown scholar Trump admin is seeking to deport By Josh Gerstein and Kyle Cheney .....A federal judge has ordered the release of a Georgetown researcher the Trump administration put into immigration detention in March as part of a crackdown on pro-Palestinian academics. U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles on Wednesday said the government offered no evidence that Indian-born Badar Khan Suri posed a danger to the community. She also said his arrest likely violated his free speech rights as well as his rights to freedom of association with his Palestinian-American wife. “The First Amendment extends to noncitizens and doesn’t distinguish between citizens and non-citizens,” Giles said during a hearing in her Alexandria courtroom. The judge said her ruling releasing Khan Suri was “totally separate” from ongoing deportation proceedings he faces in immigration court. Courthouse News: Judge finds feds retaliated against ABA for challenging cuts in court By Ryan Knappenberger .....A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the Justice Department had wrongfully retaliated against the American Bar Association by terminating grants meant to fund domestic violence and sexual assault victim services. U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, granting a preliminary injunction, found that the cancelations were a clear violation of the ABA’s First Amendment right to speak free of government interference and targeted the legal association for opposing the Trump administration in court. On April 9, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a memorandum decrying the ABA’s “support of activist causes” and prohibited Justice Department employees from participating in ABA-sponsored events, renewing personally paid-for ABA memberships and any engagement that would support ABA-sponsored publications. Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): No Injunction for 8th-Grade Student Disciplined for Wearing "Let's Go Brandon" T-Shirt to School By Eugene Volokh .....From Senior Judge Christopher Boyko's decision Monday in Conrad v. Madison Local School Dist. Bd. of Ed.: Trump Administration New York Times: Trump Administration Cancels Scores of Grants to Study Online Misinformation By Steven Lee Myers .....The Trump administration has sharply expanded its campaign against experts who track misinformation and other harmful content online, abruptly canceling scores of scientific research grants at universities across the country. The grants funded research into topics like ways to evade censors in China. One grant at the Rochester Institute of Technology, for example, sought to design a tool to detect fabricated videos or photos generated by artificial intelligence. Another, at Kent State University in Ohio, studied how malign actors posing as ordinary users manipulate information on social media. Officials at the Pentagon, the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation contend that the research has resulted in the censorship of conservative Americans online, though there is no evidence any of the studies resulted in that. The campaign stems from an executive order that President Trump issued on Jan. 20 vowing to protect the First Amendment right to free speech, but the scale of it has prompted criticism that it is targeting anyone researching misinformation. The intent, the critics have said, is in fact to stifle findings about the noxious content that is increasingly polluting social media and political discourse. Free Expression Just the News: Brown University opts not to punish student journalist who launched mini-DOGE of its administrators By Greg Piper .....Brown University cleared student journalist Alex Shieh of the last remaining charges stemming from Shieh's Department of Government Efficiency-like review of Brown administrators for the relaunch of the Brown Spectator, a conservative-libertarian student newspaper, a week after his "administrative review meeting" with a campus official. The administration variously accused Shieh of causing emotional distress to named employees in the Bloat@Brown database, improperly accessing a university database to create it, "misrepresentation" for calling himself a reporter for the Spectator and, finally, trademark infringement for putting "Brown" in the newspaper's name. But the Ivy League school's actions drew wider attention to the Bloat@Brown database and scrutiny from the House Judiciary Committee and Endowment Tax Fairness Act sponsor Texas GOP Rep. Troy Nehls, just as President Trump was threatening Harvard's tax-exempt status. Podcasts Early Returns - Law and Politics with Jan Baran: Oliver Roberts: AI and the Law, and an Education .....Jan Baran speaks with Artificial Intelligence (AI) legal expert. lawyer and teacher, Oliver Roberts, to speak about AI, its birth, its forms, and how people have historically used and are currently using the ever-changing technology. They discuss further about how AI has changed the way lawyers practice, how the courts are using it, what questions clients are asking in RFPs related to technology, and why the big law firms are investing in AI. There are plenty of upsides to using AI; but what is “AI hallucination?” Old school legal tech companies are incorporating advanced AI and new AI legal products are being promoted throughout the industry; however, any information collected through AI still requires lawyers and others to check for any false or misleading information. Spoiler Alert: Using AI may be quicker a way to research or write initially, but the AI hallucination rate can be high. Oliver also discusses recent attempts to regulate AI, including an effort at the Federal Election Commission. The States Texas Tribune: Bill to limit out-of-state donations to Texas candidates gets House approval By Kate McGee .....The Texas House approved a bill Wednesday that would limit campaign contributions from out-of-state donors to statewide and local races in Texas. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Dade Phelan, R-Beaumont, and Rep. Terri Leo Wilson, R-Galveston, would cap those out-of-state political donations to a candidate or lawmaker to $5,000 for a statewide election, $2,500 for a district office and $1,000 for a county office. House Bill 3592, which is a priority of the state Republican Party, would dramatically alter Texas’ election landscape, where there are no limits on campaign contributions from any individuals or political action committees. It would not create any limits to in-state contributions. Out-of-state PACs would still be able to make unlimited contributions to candidates. An earlier version of the bill would have prohibited PACs from giving if they receive more than 50% of funding from out-of-state residents, but Phelan said he removed that portion of the bill because he was concerned it would place a burden on candidates to do extensive research to determine a PAC’s donor history. Tennessee Lookout: Commentary What Tennessee’s PEACE Act means for free speech By Ashkken Kazaryan .....On Friday, Gov. Bill Lee signed Senate Bill 30, the Protecting Everyone Against Crime and Extremism Act (PEACE Act).The law makes it a criminal offense to leave “unsolicited flyers” on public or private property, hang signs from overpasses and bridges, ride in the back of a box truck, refuse to give one’s name or give a false name to law enforcement, and approach within 25 feet of an officer after being ordered to stop or retreat. While these provisions might sound like routine penalties for littering, limits on approaching police officers and tweaks to law enforcement powers, they raise serious First Amendment concerns. One of the most troubling aspects of the law is its expansion of the state’s intimidation law to criminalize acts like handing out flyers or trespassing if done with the “intent to intimidate” someone from exercising their rights. This language is dangerously vague, and that’s exactly the problem. “Intent to intimidate” is not clearly defined and can easily be used to target protestors, demonstrators, or anyone expressing dissent in a way that makes someone uncomfortable. Additionally, the law classifies dropping “unsolicited flyers” on private or public property as “littering,” which means a political pamphlet left on a doorstep could potentially lead to a criminal charge. The Supreme Court has long held that leafleting is protected speech, not trash. Texas Tribune: Texas House bill on lawsuits shelved after critics label it harmful to free speech By Sameea Kamal .....A bill that critics say would have eroded free speech protections will not move forward in the Texas Legislature this session. House Bill 2988 by Rep. Mano DeAyala would have removed the automatic award of attorneys fees to defendants if they prevail in what are known as SLAPP lawsuits — which opponents said would have limited free speech protections to those who can afford to independently pay for a lawyer. His office confirmed to the Tribune that the bill was tabled, which means even sponsors do not expect any more action on it before this legislative session ends in three weeks. DeAyala said in an interview with the Tribune that while the bill is not moving forward, he thinks the conversation might prompt steps to address what he sees as problems with the current law. 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