The Latest News from the Institute for Free Speech March 8, 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]. The Courts Just the News: Feds extorted social media to censor by threatening lucrative 'hidden subsidy': AGs lawsuit By Greg Piper .....Congressional Democrats and White House officials cowed social media platforms into censoring disfavored narratives on COVID-19, elections and Hunter Biden by threatening "a hidden subsidy worth billions of dollars," according to documents filed Monday in a lawsuit against the Biden administration. Suing under the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act, the plaintiffs — the Missouri and Louisiana attorneys general joined by censored doctors — filed a supplemental brief in support of a motion for preliminary injunction and 364-page proposed findings of fact that cite depositions and internal communications of current and former officials in the FBI and Departments of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and State. New Civil Liberties Alliance senior litigation counsel John Vecchione, who is representing the doctors, called it "the most comprehensive description linked to testimony and evidence of the federal government's massive pressure and control of social media companies to remove information, even true information that the government did not like, from the public square." Wall Street Journal: Supreme Court’s ‘Dark Money’ Rulings Anchor Defense in Ohio Corruption Trial By Julie Bykowicz .....Prosecutors and ethics advocates say the Ohio case illustrates the perils of undisclosed spending through nonprofits. Without the federal investigation—which included wiretaps, office raids, document seizures and cooperating witnesses—Ohioans would never have known the role FirstEnergy played in obtaining its own bailout, they say. “This trial is not just about what the former speaker of the House did, it’s also about the terrible system we have,” said Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio, which advocates for more transparency in government. States must develop their own patchwork of money-in-politics rules, but a succession of Supreme Court rulings gives wide leeway to people and groups who pay for political speech. FCC Ars Technica: Biden FCC nominee withdraws, blaming cable lobby and “unlimited dark money“ By Jon Brodkin .....President Biden's nominee to the open seat on the Federal Communications Commission, Gigi Sohn, withdrew her nomination today. "When I accepted his nomination over sixteen months ago, I could not have imagined that legions of cable and media industry lobbyists, their bought-and-paid-for surrogates, and dark money political groups with bottomless pockets would distort my over 30-year history as a consumer advocate into an absurd caricature of blatant lies," Sohn said in a statement provided to Ars and other media organizations… "It is a sad day for our country and our democracy when dominant industries, with assistance from unlimited dark money, get to choose their regulators. And with the help of their friends in the Senate, the powerful cable and media companies have done just that," Sohn also said. The States Boston Globe: SJC rules that free speech at public hearings includes right to use ‘rude, personal, and disrespectful’ words By John R. Ellement .....The use of “civility restraints” at public hearings violates free speech rights first spelled out in the state constitution by John Adams, the state’s highest court ruled Tuesday, and the new standard applies even when words used are “rude, personal, and disrespectful to public figures.” In an unanimous 29-page decision, the Supreme Judicial Court decided that current law will be based on its examination of the political atmosphere in Massachusetts during the era of the American Revolution, when Adams and others drafted what became the state constitution known as the Declaration of Rights. The ruling stems from a contentious public hearing held by selectmen in Southborough in December 2018. At the meeting, a town official cited a local “civility code” to abruptly shut down a public comment period after a resident made critical comments about a proposed property tax hike and repeated violations of the open meeting law, the SJC said. Oregon Live: Oregon Democrats say they’re serious about capping political donations, but their proposals include loopholes By Hillary Borrud .....Kotek’s proposal, House Bill 3455, would allow individuals and a variety of entities including corporations and unions to give no more than $500 per primary or general election cycle to a state House or Senate candidate and $1,000 to candidates for statewide offices such as secretary of state or governor. Rayfield’s plan, House Bill 2003, would allow individuals, corporations, unions and other entities to give up to $1,500 per primary or general election cycle to a House candidate, $2,000 to a Senate candidate and $3,000 to a candidate for statewide office. But both top Democrats’ proposals could protect the ability of membership organizations such as labor unions and business associations to continue pouring millions of dollars into candidates’ campaigns through so-called “small donor” political action committees. Their proposals could allow small donor committees to raise virtually unlimited amounts to spend on Oregon elections and neither Kotek nor Rayfield’s bills currently specify a limit on how much money a small donor committee could give to a candidate. Neither bill has yet had a hearing. The governor’s proposal “seems like a nonstarter for people pushing for what I call real reform,” said Gregory McKelvey, a political consultant and advocate for limits who is working for the good government group Common Cause. “You can make the limit $1. If there are ways for a bunch of people to get around it, it doesn’t matter.” People United for Privacy: Kentucky Senate Passes Privacy Bill with Strong Bipartisan Support By Luke Wachob .....States across the nation continue to make strides towards improving their legal protections for personal privacy. The latest good news comes from the Bluegrass State, where the Kentucky Senate passed the Personal Privacy Protection Act (PPPA) on February 22 by a vote of 31-3. The measure, S.B. 62, previously passed out of committee in a unanimous 9-0 vote. The Kentucky Senate’s vote occurred less than a month after the Indiana Senate unanimously passed its own version of the PPPA, 50-0. 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]