The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech November 18, 2022 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 Washington Examiner: FEC seeks ‘biggest expansion’ of internet regulation By Paul Bedard .....“If adopted, this proposed final rule would be the biggest expansion of FEC regulation over the internet in decades,” Republican Commissioner Sean Cooksey warned. At issue is a plan to adopt disclaimer requirements for small digital advertisements, expanding full regulation to all online political messages “promoted” even when no money is involved... Former FEC Chairman Lee Goodman, who in 2014 first raised concerns about online freedom and liberal censorship of conservatives online, told us the new rule puts a spotlight on promoting online political messages, not just paying for them. He added that the word “promoting” is not defined, giving the agency wide latitude to regulate. That could include simply groups asking staff to promote YouTube videos or other content, actions no government agency would consider regulating — until now. Regulation of promoting costs could extend beyond disclaimers and force reporting of expenditures on YouTube videos, election experts said. It could also put regulations on coordinated communications if a nonprofit organization reprints candidate information online or has any discussion with a candidate... Another former FEC member, Brad Smith, agreed. He and David Keating, writing for the Institute for Free Speech, said the new rules are too vague and could end the use of internet influencers by campaigns. The duo also said the new rules and disclaimer requirements could mess up short ads. How, for example, would a disclaimer work on a four-second internet ad? The two called on the FEC to clean up the vagueness. “The potential costs to internet communications loom too large to make an unnecessary error,” they said. New from the Institute for Free Speech Court Orders Halt to Forsyth County School Board Censorship .....Last night a federal judge ruled that key portions of the Forsyth County School Board public comment policy were unconstitutional and barred their enforcement. He also ordered the district to end its ban on Alison Hair from speaking at board meetings. The ruling came in a lawsuit filed in July by concerned parents in Forsyth County, Georgia who want school officials to confront the sexually graphic material in books they provide to children in school libraries. The Board of Education, however, has censored speakers at board meetings who read excerpts containing language the Chair deemed “inappropriate” for public comments. After Ms. Hair persisted in reading book excerpts, the Board banned her from participating in future meetings unless she agreed to limit her First Amendment rights. Ms. Hair and other parent members of the Mama Bears of Forsyth County are represented in the lawsuit by attorneys from the Institute for Free Speech. Campaign Legal Center v. FEC and Heritage Action: Brief of the Institute for Free Speech Amicus Curiae in Support of the Movant-Appellant .....This case is about what happens when a federal agency goes rogue and decides it no longer must follow its own organizing statute or respond to the authority of the federal courts. The Federal Election Commission is an independent regulatory agency led by six Commissioners. By law, no more than three Commissioners can be from any one political party. Moreover, by law, the Commission cannot investigate or sanction political actors without the approval of four or more Commissioners. The benefit of this structure is obvious: requiring four votes on a Commission divided three-three between Republicans and Democrats guarantees that there is some minimal level of bipartisan or nonpartisan support before embarking on enforcement proceedings against political speakers. This structure can and does make it more difficult for the Federal Election Commission to pursue enforcement actions. This is a feature, not a bug, of the system. Unfortunately, not everyone sees it that way. Some, including some Commissioners at the Federal Election Commission, would prefer a more partisan agency. These activist Commissioners have resorted to unprecedented procedural shenanigans to try to get their way. That is not the agency that Congress created. Specifically, they refused to allow the agency’s Office of the General Counsel to inform speakers or the public that complaints had been resolved. When challenged in court regarding their apparent inaction in these cases, these same Commissioners flouted the authority of the court, refused to allow the agency to appear, and hid from the court the fact that these matters had not only been acted upon but resolved. One of these matters involved Heritage Action for America and is before this Court. The Courts Reason: A Federal Court Blocks Florida's Stop WOKE Act. Again. By Emma Camp .....On Thursday, a federal court decided that Florida cannot try to control what opinions public college professors can espouse in class—a decisive victory for opponents of the state's Individual Freedom Act, commonly known as the "Stop WOKE Act." A lawsuit filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) argued that the Stop WOKE Act violated professors' First Amendment rights by illegally constraining what viewpoints they can espouse on a range of topics related to race, sex, and gender. On Thursday, a federal court agreed, writing that Florida cannot "prophylactically muzzle professors from expressing certain viewpoints." Candidates and Campaigns Election Law Blog: Young and Independent Voters Want Campaigns to Leave Them Alone By Tabatha Abu El-Haj .....A new survey by Civics finds that young and independent voters do not appreciate unsolicited emails and text messages from multiple campaigns and they would rather they stopped. The survey analysts conclude: “Democrats are at risk of burning out their base of grassroots donors and driving away independent voters by continuing to send huge volumes of unsolicited emails and text messages.” Key findings of the survey include: Brennan Center: 4 Takeaways About Money in the Midterms By Ian Vandewalker and Mariana Paez .....A look back at campaign finance in 2022 highlights four points. First, even massive participation by everyday Americans giving small donations is dwarfed by megadonors’ control of the process. Second, election deniers were boosted by big money from national donors, even in traditionally sleepy state races. Third, megadonors take advantage of “dark money” loopholes, which should be closed. Finally, popular reforms are advancing, like New York State’s groundbreaking small donor public financing program. The States OCPA: Paycom Loses in Attempt to Chill Free-Association Rights By Ray Carter .....Paycom has lost its most recent assault on the First Amendment in its ongoing dispute with the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (OCPA). In a recent court filing, Paycom asked an Oklahoma court to order the release of information that could directly and indirectly identify specific individuals who accessed free-market materials from OCPA. The company’s request echoed the legal strategies used by segregationists targeting the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in 1950s Alabama. However, an Oklahoma County district judge denied Paycom’s request to compel OCPA to reveal the potentially personally identifying information of its supporters or those who follow OCPA’s work, finding it was not relevant. 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 First Amendment rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government. 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 Unsubscribe [email protected] Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by [email protected]