October 21, 2025

In the News

Washington Post (LTE): Help settle these debts

By David Keating

.....In his Oct. 19 op-ed, “This is not how political campaigns should treat their workers,” Jason Ross raised an important concern about unpaid campaign workers and vendors. No one should go unpaid for their work. However, his proposed solutions, including Federal Election Commission-enforced escrow requirements and conditioning party support on a candidate’s record of paying bills, would introduce bureaucratic barriers that would not only harm smaller campaigns but also fail to address the problem.

Instead, Congress should lift contribution limits for losing campaigns. Once a candidate has lost and plans not to run again, there’s no possibility of political corruption — they hold no power and won’t from that race. Allowing losing campaigns to accept larger contributions to pay outstanding debts would help ensure workers and vendors get what they’re owed without creating new regulatory burdens.

News from the States: Personal attacks derail interim Kansas legislative committee hearing on election reform

By Tim Carpenter

.....The committee’s agenda featured a presentation by David Keating and Bradley Smith of the Institute for Free Speech, which uses litigation, research and education to promote the deregulation of elections. The organization has opposed campaign finance restrictions, including limits on contributions, primarily on First Amendment grounds.

They told the legislative committee disclosure of low-dollar campaign donors created “cancel culture concerns” for contributors and complicated fundraising. The duo recommended Kansas raise donor disclosure thresholds and tie contribution limits to inflation. They said Kansas ought to require redaction from public view of the street address of campaign donors, which would prevent potential “violence or harassment” of contributors.

“Simplify the system as much as possible,” said Keating, president of the Institute for Free Speech.

New from the Institute for Free Speech

Federal Court Blocks Minnesota’s Vendor-Disclosure Law in Victory for Free Speech

.....In a decisive win for free speech, a federal judge has blocked Minnesota from enforcing its vendor disclosure requirements against grassroots advocacy organizations Minnesota Right to Life and Minnesota Gun Rights. The ruling in the case litigated by the Institute for Free Speech protects the organizations’ ability to engage in political speech without exposing their business partners to harassment and intimidation.

U.S. District Judge Nancy E. Brasel granted the preliminary injunction today, finding that Minnesota’s requirement to publicly disclose vendor names and addresses likely violates the First Amendment. The decision prevents the state from enforcing penalties against the organizations for refusing to identify vendors who help distribute their advocacy messages.

“We’re extremely pleased with this crucial first victory in our fight to defend the First Amendment rights of grassroots organizations in Minnesota,” said Institute for Free Speech Senior Attorney Brett Nolan. “The court correctly recognized that forcing organizations to paint targets on their vendors’ backs serves no legitimate purpose and only chills protected speech.”

Supreme Court

SCOTUSblog: Supreme Court announces it will hear several major cases in December

By Amy Howe

.....First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Platkin (Dec. 2) – Whether a federal court has the power to rule on a group’s claim that a state government’s demand for information about its fundraising practices discouraged it from exercising its First Amendment rights, or whether the group must instead litigate that claim in state proceedings.

…

Trump v. Slaughter (Dec. 8) – Whether the federal law limiting the president’s power to remove members of the Federal Trade Commission violates the separation of powers between the branches of government and, if so, whether to overrule Humphrey’s Executor.

National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission (Dec. 9) – Whether a federal law limiting coordinated party expenditures violates the First Amendment.

The Courts

The Dispatch: The Lawsuit That Could Upend Campaign Finance Law

By David M. Drucker

.....If Freedom Path’s lawsuit is successful, issue-advocacy groups might be able to significantly expand political engagement as an overall percentage of their activities. That could make 501(c)4 organizations more attractive to megadonors, who might prefer avoiding disclosure in Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings—a legal requirement for super PACs. This outcome would mark a major change in campaign-finance regulations precipitated by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 and could significantly alter campaign fundraising. And even more money could flood into American politics.

“This case could be as consequential for free speech as Citizens United,” plaintiff’s attorney Chris Gober, a Republican election lawyer, told The Dispatch. Gober, who counts Elon Musk among his notable clients, is seeking the GOP nomination in Texas’ open and newly redrawn 10th Congressional District. (Gober oversaw the Republican Party’s recently completed mid-decade Texas redistricting, an effort undertaken at the behest of President Donald Trump.)...

Gober is confident Cobb’s decision will ultimately lead to new IRS rules that ease the way for issue-advocacy organizations to engage in more overt politicking typically reserved for campaigns, political parties, and super PACs, and without losing their tax exemption or having to disclose donors. 

“The unconstitutional ‘facts and circumstances’ test allowed unelected bureaucrats to restrain speech and target conservative nonprofits, so this ruling is bigger than Freedom Path,” said Gober, who is representing Freedom Path on a pro bono basis. 

Bloomberg Law: Anti-Mask Bank Worker Based in School Gets Speech Suit Revived

By Patrick Dorrian

.....A Minnesota bank, a vice president, and the superintendent of a school that housed a bank branch must face retaliation claims by a bank employee fired after speaking out against Covid-19 masks in schools.

The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Monday unanimously revived Tara McNeally’s free-speech claims against HomeTown Bank, bank executive Lindsey Puffer, and Shakopee Public Schools superintendent Michael Redmond. But the three-judge panel divided over whether the allegations against Redmond were properly analyzed under the test traditionally used in First Amendment cases to balance a public employee’s speech interests against a public employer’s interest in ...

Maryland Matters: Judge strikes down provision of digital ad tax as First Amendment violation

By Bryan P. Sears

.....Maryland will not be able to enforce part of a 2021 law that allowed it to obscure the costs of a digital ad tax from consumers who were paying it.

The order — which will not be appealed by the state — strikes down one portion of the first-of-its-kind tax on digital advertising within the state. That provision prohibited online companies from alerting consumers to the tax, by passing it on to them as a surcharge, fee or line item on their bills.

Opponents of the law had said that it required them to collect the tax but prohibited them from telling customers where the tax came from — shielding lawmakers who approved the tax from criticism, and violating the businesses’ free speech rights, they said.

U.S. District Court Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby, in a one-page order Wednesday, issued a declaratory judgement in favor of the tech industry that had sued to block the tax, saying the targeted provision of the law “facially violates the First Amendment.”

FEMA

Racket News: Exclusive: FEMA Workers Improperly Collected Data About Politics of Disaster Victims

By Matt Taibbi

.....Last November 8th, on the Saturday after Election Day, one of the more bizarre post-scripts to Donald Trump’s re-election emerged in the form of a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) decision to sideline one official accused of telling FEMA workers to “avoid homes advertising Trump” while canvassing for victims of Hurricane Milton in Florida. The Daily Wire spoke to multiple FEMA officials who produced screenshots of entries like “Trump sign, no contact per leadership”[.]

The most painful confirmation, however, came from then-FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell, who testified after the election that the episode was an “isolated incident,” as well as “unacceptable” and “heartbreaking,” suggesting the problem was limited to one eventually-terminated Disaster Survivor Assistance crew leader named Marn’i Washington, adding: “I do not believe that this employee’s actions are indicative of any widespread cultural problems at FEMA.”

Washington didn’t take the CYA maneuver lying down. She made a series of aggressive media appearances, saying repeatedly “my orders come from my superior” from above when instructing subordinates to avoid homes that made some FEMA workers “uncomfortable” by featuring Trump paraphernalia[.]

Congress

National Review: Republicans and Democrats Can’t Agree on Anything — Except the AI Threat

By James Lynch

.....Citing an imperative to protect American workers and children from the predations of artificial intelligence, a bipartisan coalition is emerging to establish safeguards around the technology.

The AI safety movement is fast becoming a powerful force on the state and national levels with advocates spanning the entire political spectrum. Its growing political strength corresponds with polling data showing an overwhelming majority of Americans want policymakers to prioritize safety, even as AI boosters warn that any guardrails will inevitably slow innovation…

Blackburn has proposed bipartisan legislation, the NO FAKES Act, to prevent AI from using the voice and likeness of any individual without authorization. Alongside Senators Thom Tillis (R., N.C.), Chris Coons (D., Del.), and Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.), she first introduced the bill last year and reintroduced it earlier this year.

The support Blackburn has received from Republicans, who have been willing to weather criticism from Silicon Valley, is reflective of the AI skepticism emerging within the MAGA movement.

Candidates and Campaigns

Axios: Scoop: DNC ramps up crackdown on alleged "scam PACs"

By Alex Thompson

.....The Democratic National Committee on Wednesday sent a cease-and-desist letter alleging a super PAC is "exploiting the goodwill of Democratic voters for personal profit."

Why it matters: It's part of the DNC's larger campaign to root out PACs and super PACs that raise money in the name of the Democratic Party, but often don't invest a lot of their money in Democratic candidates.

Driving the news: The DNC sent the letter to the "National Democrats," a super PAC that has raised over $500,000 from last year through the end of June — mostly from small, grassroots donations — and spent less than $10,000 on just one candidate.

• The DNC argued that much of that money was "solicited primarily through misleading text message campaigns."
• National Democrats spent much of their cash on digital fundraising, including text messaging, according to their filings with the Federal Election Commission.
• National Democrats, which has a disclaimer at the bottom of their website that states it's not affiliated with any other committee, claims to be "working to elect progressive leaders of the future, who can restore the American dream for all."

The States

People United for Privacy: New PUFPF Model Policy Protects Campaign Donors From Political Violence by Redacting Home Address and Employer Information

.....People United for Privacy Foundation (PUFPF) today announced the release of a new model policy, the Protect Donors at Home Act, to prevent political violence and safeguard civic engagement. The policy directs state agencies to redact campaign donors’ street names, street numbers, and employer information from public databases. Campaigns may still be required to provide this sensitive information to the appropriate state regulator, but it would no longer be made available to the public.

“Most Americans are not aware that making a $10 or $20 political donation can result in their home address being published online in a permanent, searchable database. At a time of rising political violence, these outdated laws create unnecessary risk for small donors by publicly disclosing detailed information about where they live and work,” said Heather Lauer, CEO of People United for Privacy Foundation.

“Political violence isn’t just a threat to public officials. It’s affecting ordinary Americans who participate in our democracy. Our laws should protect civic participation, not turn citizens into targets for harassment at their homes or workplaces,” said Alex Baiocco, PUFPF’s Director of Government Affairs. 

The Oregonian: The clock is ticking for Oregon officials to deliver on campaign finance reform. Will they do it?

By Carlos Fuentes

.....When Oregon legislators approved limits on political contributions last spring, they promised they’d soon move beyond the basics of the law and deliver needed clarifications and improvements on how it would work.

But more than a year into that process, efforts by the Secretary of State’s Office to limit the role of money in politics have stalled, despite Oregonians’ strong support for such restrictions. Progress has been impeded by vague guidance from lawmakers and insufficient funding, raising the odds of a bungled rollout that could leave massive loopholes in Oregon’s campaign finance system…

“The challenges with (the law) can be boiled down to this: We need more guidance to get this right, and time is short,” Secretary of State Tobias Read told lawmakers in June. “Unfortunately, the choice now is between getting this done fast or getting this done right.”

Read’s office is now months into a rulemaking process to determine how the law will be interpreted and enforced. While his staffers have resolved some weaknesses surfaced by groups closely watching the law, they say some of the most significant flaws can only be addressed by lawmakers taking action.