Email from The Institute for Free Speech The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech December 11, 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 Medill on the Hill: Supreme Court considers slashing campaign spending restrictions for political parties By Desiree Luo .....The Supreme Court appeared set to further loosen limits on campaign finance, despite opposition from liberal justices during oral arguments Tuesday. The case challenges limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates, most of which goes toward advertisements… A ruling in the petitioners’ favor wouldn’t come as a surprise to Institute for Free Speech senior attorney Brett Nolan, who co-authored the IFS’ amicus brief in support of the petitioners. “I don’t think that this is a court that, on these kinds of issues, is afraid of overruling precedent,” Nolan said. The court is expected to rule on the case by summer 2026. Ed. note: Miss oral arguments? Listen here. Read our amicus brief here. The Courts USA Today: Supreme Court rejects free speech case over controversial vanity plate By Maureen Groppe .....The Supreme Court won’t get involved in states’ regulation of vanity license plates, rejecting an appeal from a Tennessee woman challenging the rejection of her controversial '69PWNDU’ personalized plate. The court on Dec. 8 declined to hear an appeal from Leah Gilliam, who argued that states’ rules for what is and isn’t allowed on personalized plates are often unclear and can amount to a “dizzying array of censorship.” She wanted the court to find that she is expressing her own views through a vanity plate, not the government’s, a decision that would have limited states’ ability to control that message. Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): No Injunction Against Prosecution for Taking Photo of Transgender Politician Washing Hands in Women's Restroom By Eugene Volokh .....From Fifth Circuit Judge Priscilla Richman, joined by Judge Irma Ramirez, in today's Evans v. Garza [UPDATE: link fixed]: During a debate by lawmakers at the Texas Capitol in 2023, Michelle Evans tweeted a photograph of a transgender (biologically male) politician washing their hands in the women's restroom. Evans surrendered her cell phone to police after she learned the Travis County District Attorney, José Garza, was investigating whether her tweet violated Texas Penal Code § 21.15(b)…. Evans sued, seeking a preliminary injunction against any such prosecution, but the Fifth Circuit panel said no… Judge Andrew Oldham dissented: “Michelle Evans retweeted a picture of a fully clothed man washing his hands in the women's bathroom at the Texas State Capitol. For that purported sin, Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza opened a criminal investigation and threatened to bring the awesome weight of the County's prosecutorial machinery down on Ms. Evans…. The dissent reasoned that the statute "cannot be constitutionally applied to Evans," because in this case, ‘the statute unconstitutionally suppresses political speech’”: Congress The Free Press: Elon Musk Left DOGE, but Democrats Want to Close the ‘Self-Dealing’ Loophole By Gabe Kaminsky .....In the latest sign that Musk is gone but not forgotten, some House Democrats will introduce legislation on Thursday aimed at closing what they claim are loopholes in federal law for special government employees (SGEs) like him. The bill would ban many such employees and their companies from receiving over $1 million in funding per year from the agencies where they work, according to a copy of the bill’s text reviewed by The Free Press. The bill also would create a searchable database of SGEs. There now is no centralized tracking and disclosure system for such employees. Trump Administration NBC News: Foreign tourists could be required to disclose 5 years of social media histories under Trump administration plan By Julia Ainsley and Phil Helsel .....The Trump administration plans to require travelers from more than 40 countries to provide their social media histories from the last five years to enter the U.S., according to a notice published Tuesday in the Federal Register. The data would be “mandatory” for new entrants to the U.S., who hail from 42 countries that are part of the visa waiver program, according to the notice from Customs and Border Protection. Reason: Trump Is Using the 'Misinformation' Censorship Playbook Republicans Attacked Biden For By David Inserra .....Today, the Trump administration appears to be invoking Murthy as cover for its own pressure campaigns against online platforms. Apple removed an app that allowed users to report sightings of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in real time. After complaints from Attorney General Pam Bondi, Meta removed a Facebook group that shared information about ICE agents. Now, the DHS says it is communicating with social media companies about supposed immigration misinformation. It would be naive to suppose it hasn't applied any pressure during those talks. It is entirely possible that the government can point to specific acts of illegality. It's also possible that some of this content violates platform policies. For example, Meta claimed it removed the Facebook page with information on ICE agents for violating its "policies against coordinated harm." It is possible this group was persistently violating this policy. But as long as these companies remain vulnerable to government pressure, we cannot simply trust officials who insist their demands are legitimate. Free Expression Reason: How Foreign Governments Police U.S. Speech By Nick Gillespie | .....Today's guest is Sarah McLaughlin, a senior scholar at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and author of Authoritarians in the Academy: How the Internationalization of Higher Education and Borderless Censorship Threaten Free Speech. She explains how governments in places like China and the United Arab Emirates restrict academic freedom and expression not just in their own countries but also at colleges and universities in America by exploiting speech codes and threatening to end lucrative satellite campus arrangements. McLaughlin and Gillespie also talk about whether it was a good idea for American comedians to censor their material at Saudi Arabia's Riyadh Comedy Festival and what to make of President Donald Trump's repeated minimization of the murder of Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi operatives. The States KVUE: Save Austin Now sues city manager over logo parody use By Kate Norum .....Political action committee (PAC) Save Austin Now has filed a lawsuit against Austin City Manager T.C. Broadnax, alleging the city is interfering with its First Amendment rights over its parody use of the city’s new logo. The PAC is asking a Travis County judge to block Broadnax from taking further action, claiming its use of the logo is protected political speech. The lawsuit follows a letter the city sent to Save Austin Now accusing it of unauthorized use of the logo on its website. Reason (Volokh Conspiracy): California Anti-SLAPP Statute Doesn't Apply to Claim of Politically Motivated Threatening Conduct By Eugene Volokh .....Anti-SLAPP statutes allow defendants who are sued based on their speech on matters of public concern to quickly challenge the sufficiency of plaintiffs' claims. They are important tools in fighting legally meritless libel suits and other attempts to restrict legally protected speech. But they only apply to claims that are indeed based on such speech, and not claims that are based on non-speech conduct. A short excerpt from yesterday's long opinion by California Court of Appeal Justice Allison Danner, joined by Justices Mary Greenwood and Daniel Bromberg, in Khalil v. Steiner, applies this distinction. The plaintiffs—a young woman, her apparently 13-year-old sister, and their sister-in-law—"constructed a 'Free Palestine' sign out of shrubs and seaweed on a sand dune near Sand City known as 'Scribble Hill,'" where it was visible from Highway 1 and the pedestrian path below the dune. Defendant, "who was cycling on the path, stopped his bicycle, climbed the dune, and began dismantling the sign while engaging in a heated verbal exchange with the young women." New York Times: When Is a Painting a Campaign Finance Violation? By Michaela Towfighi .....For a museum exhibition about the Little Saigon neighborhood in Denver, a local artist was commissioned to paint a portrait of a Vietnamese immigrant and her daughter, with chrysanthemums, dried squid snacks and Lunar New Year lanterns in the background. The final version included images of people detained or deported by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and political messages like “Sudan Stands With Palestine.” But when History Colorado Center, a state museum, pulled the artwork days before the exhibition opened in October, it did not mention either of those contentious topics. Instead, it said the painting might violate the state’s Fair Campaign Practices Act, which prohibits state agencies from contributing to political campaigns or influencing voters. Among the dozen people that the artist, Madalyn Drewno, included in her collage was Senator John Hickenlooper, with green dollar signs over his eyes. Red hands were slapped on Gov. Jared Polis’s face. Capital letters framing Senator Michael Bennet’s face said he “funds genocide.” “Exhibiting this piece could be considered a violation of that act and expose the institution to legal risk,” Joie Ha, the executive director of Colorado Asian Pacific United, the nonprofit coalition that commissioned the artwork, wrote in an email informing Drewno of the decision. New Jersey Monitor: NJ Supreme Court declines to hear fusion voting case By Nikita Biryukov .....New Jersey’s Supreme Court declined to take up a case that challenged a state law barring candidates from running under the banner of more than one party, ending efforts to overturn the more than a century-old ban through the courts. The Moderate Party had argued that the state’s ban on fusion voting, which allows candidates to appear on a ballot multiple times on different parties’ tickets, ran afoul of rights to free speech, association, assembly, and equal protection guaranteed by the New Jersey Constitution. Supporters of fusion voting, which is allowed in New York, have argued that the state’s ban on the practice deliberately excludes “new ideas and new parties from the political marketplace.” 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