Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech November 12, 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 NH Journal: Attorney for Bow’s Ban on Wristband Protests Compares Free Speech to ‘Poison’ By Damien Fisher .....The parents want to be able to engage in silent protests at high school games. But Shirley told the court the potential danger presented by middle-aged parents wearing wristbands is too great. “You know, poison is often determined by the dose,” Shirley said of their right to protest. “We’re talking about future events where we don’t have an understanding of how many people are going to be showing up with these wristbands.” Del Kolde, the lawyer with the Institute for Free Speech representing the parents, promptly replied: “Your Honors, free speech is not poison.” The judges were clearly puzzled by — if not outright hostile to — the district’s claims that speech that offended others or hurt their feelings should not be protected by the First Amendment. The Courts Courthouse News: Second Circuit gives Trump another stab at bucking hush money conviction By Erik Uebelacker .....A federal appeals court on Thursday revived President Donald Trump’s bid to fight his 2024 criminal conviction, ruling that Trump should be able to present immunity arguments to a judge in the Southern District of New York. A panel of three Second Circuit judges sent the case back to U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, a federal judge in Manhattan, finding that Hellerstein should address whether Trump’s conviction ran afoul of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling for broad presidential immunity. They stopped short of telling Hellerstein, a Bill Clinton appointee, how he should rule, however. “We leave it to the able and experienced district judge to decide whether to solicit further briefing from the parties or hold a hearing to help it resolve these issues,” the judges wrote in a 28-page opinion. “We express no view and ‘neither rule nor imply’ that the district court should resolve Trump’s motion for leave to file a second removal notice in any particular way.” Politico: Judge orders Education Department to halt ‘partisan’ employee email messages By Juan Perez Jr. and Hassan Ali Kanu .....A federal judge Friday ordered the Education Department to remove what he described as partisan language from employees’ automated out-of-office email responses — a win for unionized department workers who accused the Trump administration of violating their First Amendment rights. U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper said the agency wrongfully assigned workers email responses that blamed congressional Democrats for the ongoing government shutdown — siding with the American Federation of Government Employees, which sued last month to challenge email messages the labor union said forced workers to “involuntarily parrot the Trump Administration’s talking points with emails sent out in their names.” Fox News (via New York Post): Oregon girls who protested trans athlete at track and field medal podium score legal win in lawsuit By Jackson Thompson .....Oregon teens Alexa Anderson and Reese Eckard scored a win in their legal battle against the state’s high school sports association after they stepped down from a medal podium to protest a trans athlete in May. Anderson and Eckard’s lawsuit against the Oregon School Activities Association (OSAA) alleges the league excluded them from official photos after the protest and even withheld their medals. The suit argues the girls’ First Amendment rights were infringed upon by the officials. US District Court Judge Youlee Yim You denied the OSAA’s motion to strike a portion of the lawsuit that highlighted what forms of political speech the league does allow, including Black Lives Matter and pro-LGBTQ pride messaging, which was a key point in the plaintiffs’ argument. Anderson condemned the OSAA for attempting to strike that argument in a statement to Fox News Digital. USA Today: He got cuffed after playing the 'Imperial March' at National Guard. Now, he's suing. By BrieAnna J. Frank .....Sam O’Hara was walking his 10-year-old rescue dog Lincoln, a daschund mix, near Dupont Circle in Washington, DC, in late August when he saw two National Guard members patrolling the area. “The thought just kind of dawned on me that they look like stormtroopers,” the 35-year-old O’Hara said. So he opened Spotify on his phone, called up the iconic "Imperial March" theme from "Star Wars" and began playing it aloud. O'Hara doesn't own a light saber but said he's seen all of the "Star Wars" movies and has “always identified with the rebellion." The John Williams-composed song symbolizes Darth Vader and the evil Galactic Empire. Playing it behind troops and recording the interactions to post on TikTok was a creative and peaceful way, he thought, to protest what he described as the National Guard’s unnecessary and anxiety-inducing presence in the city… The National Guard troops he approached that first day took it in stride, he said, adding that others in subsequent encounters responded with smiles and waves. But Sept. 11 was different. The events of that day prompted the American Civil Liberties Union to sue authorities on O’Hara’s behalf for alleged violations of his First and Fourth Amendment rights, among other claims. IRS Reason: Stealing Innocent People's Tax Returns Isn't Heroic. The IRS Leaker Doesn't Deserve a Do-Over. By Joe Bishop-Henchman and Pete Sepp .....Between 2018 and 2020, while working as a contractor for the IRS through Booz Allen Hamilton, Littlejohn stole and leaked the confidential tax returns of roughly 405,000 individuals, businesses, and even charities. He and his allies celebrated exposing President Donald Trump's filings, but it's hardly a public service to expose the records of hundreds of thousands of other innocent, unsuspecting Americans—an act ProPublica turned into a yearslong political spectacle with more than 50 stories targeting their ideological opponents. What's been the effect? Actual tax evaders are incentivized to take their finances further underground. Meanwhile, the exposure encourages innocent taxpayers to fear that the press will drag their law-abiding—yet private—personal and business dealings into public turmoil. When investigators began closing in, Littlejohn destroyed much of the evidence of his crime. After he was caught, he pleaded guilty to illegally disclosing tax returns and return information without authorization. Congress New York Post: Sen. Hagerty rolls out bill to bar foreigners from funding US elections By Ryan King .....Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) and seven other Republican senators have rolled out legislation intended to prevent foreign donors from funneling cash into projects impacting US elections. While it is illegal for foreign nationals to donate to federal, state or local campaigns, some have contributed to intermediaries backing specific policy goals and adjacent efforts like get-out-the-vote activity. Hagerty’s Preventing Foreign Interference in American Elections Act targets those workarounds... The bill, which Hagerty introduced last year as well, bars foreign nationals from contributing to efforts related to get-out-the-vote activities, state ballot initiatives, ballot harvesting, and/or public communications that elevate a political party. Under the Preventing Foreign Interference in American Elections Act, foreign nationals would be barred from donating to conduits that then use that money for activities related to American elections. The measure also features safeguards aimed at stopping federal probes from being overly broad or demanding, including a mechanism that allows for petitions to squash subpoenas on the basis of bias… House Committee on Administration Chairman Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) plans to reintroduce companion legislation in the lower chamber but the timing hasn’t yet been determined, The Post has learned. Free Expression The Atlantic: The Third Red Scare By Quinta Jurecic .....During the first 10 months of Trump’s second term in office, the federal government has cracked down on political expression—often understood as the most protected category of speech—with a persistence and viciousness reminiscent of some of the darkest periods of U.S. history. The administration has pushed for the prosecution of the president’s political opponents, fired government employees for taking positions perceived as less than entirely loyal to Trump, and barred certain law firms from working with the government because they displeased the president. It blocked AP reporters from the White House press pool because the wire service refused to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America.” It has investigated media companies and threatened to withhold merger approvals unless networks get rid of DEI policies; slashed billions of dollars in grants that it characterized as deriving from “immoral” and “illegal” DEI practices; and withheld funding for high-profile universities such as Harvard and Columbia with the goal of forcing their capitulation to the administration’s political agenda. New York Times: The Battle in Virginia Over an Activist Who Protested Stephen Miller By Devlin Barrett .....Federal and state criminal investigations into a Virginia woman who distributed leaflets disclosing the home address of a White House official, Stephen Miller, have prompted a secret court fight over the balance between personal safety and free speech at a time of rising political violence, recently unsealed court documents show. The records, which were reviewed by The New York Times, reveal that a local court approved the search of a cellphone belonging to the woman as part of an investigation that included multiple local law enforcement agencies as well as the F.B.I. and Secret Service. The activist, Barbara Wien, has not been charged with any crime, though the Virginia State Police still have her phone. The investigation remains active, leaving it unclear whether law enforcement has since gathered additional evidence. The dispute captures the fierce tensions over political activism that have become a defining feature of the second Trump presidency, pitting the Miller family’s concerns for their security against the First Amendment claims of a critic of the administration. Candidates and Campaigns Wiley: Michael Toner and Karen Trainer Co-Author Chapter on Emerging Campaign Finance Trends and the 2024 Election .....Michael E. Toner, chair of the Election Law Practice, and Karen E. Trainer, senior reporting specialist, have co-authored a chapter for the recently released book, Campaign of Chaos: Trump, Biden, Harris, and the 2024 American Election, which provides a comprehensive analysis of the unprecedented campaign finance trends of the 2024 U.S. presidential and congressional elections. The chapter, “The $16 Billion Election: Emerging Campaign Finance Trends and their Impact on the 2024 Presidential Race and Beyond,” delves into the record-breaking fundraising and historic elements of the 2024 election, including the role of super PACs and other outside groups, as well as the influence of megadonors. Additionally, the chapter discusses the impact and implications of social media usage during the election, the rising popularity of early voting, and looks ahead to the 2028 election. The States Steptoe: State Legislatures Take on FARA with New FARA-Style Bills By Jason Abel, Elizabeth Goodwin, Adie J. Olson, and Claire Rajan .....This year has seen a wave of proposed bills in state legislatures across the United States aimed at regulating foreign-influenced political activity at the state level. While legislation varies from state to state, their shared goal is to bring transparency to political activity by foreign entities or countries or to target influence activities undertaken by certain foreign governments. While stylized to mirror portions of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), in reality, many of these laws are broader than FARA and lack the core exemptions that companies may have grown accustomed to relying upon. FARA, enacted in 1938, is a federal disclosure statute that requires "foreign agents" to register with the Attorney General and follow onerous disclosure requirements. Between 1966 and 2015, the Department of Justice (DOJ) brought only seven criminal prosecutions under FARA. However, since 2016, there has been a surge in prosecutions, including some high-profile cases. Due to FARA's broad disclosure requirements and various exemptions, ambiguity persists regarding the scope of the statute’s requirements. This surge in FARA enforcement activity has sparked interest in regulating foreign agent activity at the state level. Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): Crime in Illinois to Send E-Mails (with Intent to Offend) That Are "Disgusting to the Senses" or "Abhorrent to Morality or Virtue" By Eugene Volokh .....From People v. Ocampo, decided by Illinois Appellate Court Justice David Navarro: [Carlos] Ocampo was charged with harassment through electronic communications based on a series of emails .… One of [Ocampo's] pleadings … contained a statement of charges from the Illinois Department of Revenue (IDOR), which sought termination of Ocampo's employment for alleged actions that took place from March 2021 to February 2022. Those allegations were that Ocampo: (1) sent multiple emails to multiple recipients that "contained numerous and unsupported and unsubstantiated allegations against IDOR employees and included inappropriate pictures of his vomit in a toilet bowl"; (2) sent multiple emails that contained "racially sensitive remarks, inappropriate photos, and disparaging comments in an attempt to harm or destroy the reputation of fellow State employees"; and (3) harassed several members of IDOR after having been asked not to contact them. Ocampo was ultimately terminated…. 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