The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech January 4, 2023 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 For Purpose Law Group: A New Lawsuit: Form 990, Schedule B, Challenged By Linda J. Rosenthal .....[Following the Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta Supreme Court ruling], many observers speculated that the federal mandate – namely, the confidential donor disclosures of Form 990, Schedule B – might next be on the chopping block. The consensus view has been that it’s not a matter of “if” but only “when.” Now, eighteen months later, “when” has arrived. A lawsuit designed to test the constitutionality of the federal requirement has just entered the judicial pipeline. On December 5, 2022, The Buckeye Institute, a 501(c)(3) conservative think tank that regularly undertakes a variety of legal challenges filed a Complaint in the Southern District of Ohio, District of Columbus, where it is headquartered. In this action, the organization seeks declaratory relief and an injunction prohibiting the U.S. government from enforcing the confidential, to-the-government-only, donor-disclosure requirements of 501(c)(3) public charities on federal Form 990, Schedule B. Based directly on the Americans for Prosperity Foundation holding, the group asserts that the Schedule B mandate has a chilling effect on its potential donors, and violates its and its supporters’ rights to freedom of speech and association. There can be little doubt that the plaintiffs in The Buckeye Institute v. Internal Revenue Service et al, Case No. 2:22-cv-04297-MHW-EPD, will ultimately prevail. The Courts WUSF: Five local officials aim to block Florida's lobbying restrictions By Jim Saunders .....A federal judge will hear arguments Jan. 27 in an attempt by a group of elected local state officials to block new lobbying restrictions that they argue violate First Amendment rights. The officials from Miami-Dade, Palm Beach and Leon counties filed a lawsuit last week in federal court in Miami challenging the restrictions, which take effect Saturday. Florida voters in 2018 passed a constitutional amendment approving the restrictions, and the Legislature this year approved bills to carry out the amendment. The lawsuit focuses heavily on part of the restrictions that will prevent state and local officials from lobbying other government bodies while in office. At least some of the plaintiffs do lobbying work. Congress Washington Examiner: Three watchdogs with different politics explain what they want House GOP to investigate By Gabe Kaminsky .....[Craig Holman of Public Citizen] said that investigating foreign interference in elections "through social media and the internet" would be valuable since the Federal Election Commission "has not dealt with it in any meaningful way." The DOJ in October charged 13 people, including Chinese spies and government officials, with allegedly trying to interfere in U.S. elections… David O’Brien is the policy director for RepresentUs, a nonpartisan group focused on tracking corruption and mending "our broken political system." Like Holman, he said House Republicans would be wise to investigate the role of foreign influence in elections. Donor Privacy Boston Herald: McGuigan: Donating to a cause differs from political giving By Elizabeth McGuigan .....Recently, some activists and policymakers have pushed to restrict donors’ rights regarding public policy giving. Privacy opponents claim there’s not enough clear division between giving to policy nonprofits versus donating to political parties and candidates. But the truth is, when we conflate politics with policy, it can negatively affect communities that rely on philanthropy. When donors’ privacy is not protected under the law and their giving to 501(c)3 organizations is viewed as equal to their political giving, it can stifle that effective giving... Charities’ ability to engage in policy debates is at the core of our civil society. Funding the tax-exempt charitable organization of their choice is part of Americans’ right to free speech. Any gift to a 501(c)(3) organization is a charitable gift — including policy philanthropy — and donor privacy must be protected. Free Expression Jewish Press: Ontario College of Psychology Demands ‘Retraining’ for Conservative Pundit Jordan Peterson By Hana Levi Julian .....The Ontario College of Psychologists has demanded that Dr. Jordan B. Peterson submit himself to “mandatory social media communication retraining” with its experts. The November 22, 2022, decision by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee was confirmed by the College in a statement on its website saying it had “decided to require Dr. Jordan Peterson to successfully complete a prescribed Specified Continuing Education or Remedial Program (SCERP). The substance of the SCERP is a Coaching Program to address issues regarding professionalism in public statements.”... The retraining was mandated in response to Peterson’s retweets of posts by @Pierre Poilevre and criticism of Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his political allies, Peterson wrote in a series of tweets. The Hill: Zelensky signs controversial law expanding government power to regulate media By Brad Dress .....Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed into law a controversial statute expanding the government’s power to regulate media groups and journalists in the country. Zelensky signed the legislation on Thursday over the objections of media unions and press freedom organizations that warned it will have a chilling effect on free speech. Online Speech Platforms Washington Post: Twitter reverses longstanding ban on political advertising By Elizabeth Dwoskin .....Twitter said it was relaxing its ban on political and issue-based advertising on Tuesday, a reversal of the company’s long-standing approach to paid political speech. The policy change, which comes at a moment when major advertisers are defecting from the beleaguered social media platform, would allow candidates and advocacy groups to spend money to promote themselves and their causes on the service. “We believe that cause-based advertising can facilitate public conversation around important topics. Today, we’re relaxing our ads policy for cause-based ads in the US. We also plan to expand the political advertising we permit in the coming weeks,” the tweet said. A second tweet clarified that the company would first ensure that its approach “to reviewing and approving content protects people on Twitter.” Reason ("Volokh Conspiracy"): Journal of Free Speech Law: "Why Social Media Platforms Are Not Common Carriers," by Prof. Ash Bhagwat (UC Davis) By Eugene Volokh .....Just published at 2 J. Free Speech L. 127 (2022), as part of the "Non-Governmental Restrictions on Free Speech" symposium; here's the Abstract: Daily Wire: Five Takeaways From Twitter FBI Agent’s Deposition In Censorship Lawsuit Brought By Conservative States By Luke Rosiak .....The deposition showed that Chan — the Assistant Special Agent in Charge of the Cyber Branch for the FBI’s San Francisco Division — interacted not just with Twitter, but with other tech companies about what he called “misinformation” that could impact elections. Another government agency, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), also held frequent meetings with the companies, sometimes alongside Chan. Here are some takeaways from the nearly 400-page transcript of Chan’s testimony: The States ProPublica: Muzzled by DeSantis, Critical Race Theory Professors Cancel Courses or Modify Their Teaching By Daniel Golden .....Last April, DeSantis signed the Individual Freedom Act, also known as the “Stop Woke Act,” into law. It bans teaching that one race or gender is morally superior to another and prohibits teachers from making students feel guilty for past discrimination by members of their race. And it specifically bars portraying racial colorblindness — which the law labels a virtue — as racist. A DeSantis spokesperson, Jeremy Redfern, told me in an email that the law “protects the open exchange of ideas” (italics in the original) by prohibiting teachers from “forcing discriminatory concepts on students.” Whatever one thinks of critical race theory, the state’s interference limits the freedom of professors who are experts in their fields to decide what to teach their students. Cox worried, not without reason, that the law effectively banned him from discussing his ideas in class, and that teaching the courses could cost him his livelihood. 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]