We’re Hiring!
Legal Director – Institute for Free Speech – Washington, DC or Virtual Office
The Institute for Free Speech anticipates the need for a highly experienced attorney to direct our litigation and legal advocacy. In September, President Trump announced the nomination of our longtime Legal Director to the Federal Election Commission. In late October, the President nominated two others to fill the remaining vacancies on the Commission, and a confirmation hearing was held in mid-November. After the Committee acts to approve the nominations, which may occur in early December, the Institute for Free Speech will move forward with interviewing applicants.
This is a rare opportunity to develop and implement a long-term legal strategy directed toward the protection of Constitutional rights. You would work to create legal precedents clearing away a thicket of laws and regulations that suppress speech about government and candidates for political office, that threaten citizens’ privacy if they speak or join groups, and that impose heavy burdens on organized political activity.
The Legal Director will direct our litigation and legal advocacy, lead our in-house legal team, and manage and expand our network of volunteer attorneys.
A strong preference will be given to candidates who can work in our Washington, D.C. headquarters. However, we will consider exceptionally strong candidates living and working virtually from anywhere in the country.
[You can learn more about this role and apply for the position here.]
New from the Institute for Free Speech
IFS Joins Amicus Brief Calling for Equal Rights for Non-Media Speakers
By Luke Wachob
Does freedom of the press belong to the institutional media or to every American who wishes to publish?
Last week, the Institute for Free Speech joined an amicus brief to the Oregon Supreme Court in an important case on this question. In Lowell v. Wright, an Oregon court ruled that plaintiffs in defamation cases can more easily sue and get damages from regular citizens than incorporated media entities. This ruling contradicts consistent Supreme Court rulings that the institutional press has no greater constitutional privilege than ordinary Americans.
The amicus brief was signed by IFS, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Oregon Law Professors William Funk, Ofer Raban, and Kyu Ho Youm, and legal bloggers Professor Glenn Reynolds, Howard Bashman, SCOTUSblog, and Professor Eugene Volokh.
Professor Volokh published an excerpt of the brief in Reason. You should check it out. Or read the full brief here.
Congress
Politico: Huddle
By Melanie Zanona
The Senate meets at 10 a.m. Lawmakers will take three votes at 11 a.m. on confirmation of the nominations of Allen Dickerson, Shana Broussard and Sean Cooksey to be members of the Federal Election Commission.
Washington Post: Senate confirms Trump nominee for FCC, threatening deadlock under Biden
By Tony Romm
The Senate on Tuesday confirmed Nathan Simington as a new Republican member of the Federal Communications Commission, a move that threatens to saddle the nation’s foremost telecom regulator with political deadlock at the start of the Biden administration.
The chamber backed Simington on a 49-to-46 vote, installing a new commissioner at the FCC who has pledged “regulatory stability” and expressed an openness to using the agency’s rulemaking powers to explore the way social media sites handle political speech…
The last-minute race to confirm Simington comes as Trump ratchets up his attacks on Silicon Valley over allegations that it exhibits political bias against conservatives…
The timing of Simington’s nomination – and his past work and public comments on political speech – have greatly troubled Democrats. Party leaders mounted a last-minute effort this week to question his political independence and stop his confirmation.
The Hill: Senate Democrats urge Google to improve ad policies to combat election disinformation
By Rebecca Klar
Senate Democrats on Monday urged Google to improve its ad policies regarding election disinformation and voter suppression, accusing the company of failing even to enforce its own “inadequate” policy.
Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) led the group of 11 senators in a letter that called on the tech giant to strengthen the enforcement of its policies regarding election-related disinformation, including rejecting all ads spreading election disinformation and stopping ad services on websites that spread false information.
“Google continues to operate with a narrow and incomprehensive political ads policy that has major loopholes. It is also failing to enforce even this inadequate policy,” the senators wrote. “As a result, the company is profiting from ads that spread voting and election disinformation and helping disinformation sites profit from their lies. Our democracy deserves better.” …
Monday’s letter was also signed by Democratic Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.), Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Mazie Hirono(Hawaii), Chris Coons (Del.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) and Cory Booker (N.J.), as well as Sen. Angus King (I-Maine).
Free Speech
Wall Street Journal: Education Department Blasts ‘Culture of Censorship’ at Colleges, Sets Up Free-Speech Email Hotline to Report Violations
By Melissa Korn
The Education Department has set up a hotline where students and staff can report concerns about free-speech violations on college campuses, the latest effort by the Trump administration to ensure conservative or otherwise unpopular views are respected at schools they say can hew too liberal.
The Free Speech Hotline was announced Tuesday at an event billed to confront a “culture of censorship” at colleges and featuring Education Department officials, a current undergraduate and former and current professors. They spoke about the perceived dangers of stifling First Amendment rights by staging protests against guest speakers, heckling faculty members or limiting students’ opportunity to speak on sensitive subjects like abortion.
Newsweek: 88 Percent of Colleges in U.S. Have Restrictions on Free Speech, New Report Shows
By Matthew Impelli
Among 478 institutions surveyed, nine in 10 restrict free speech in some capacity, accounting for 88 percent of all colleges across the U.S., according to the report, published Tuesday by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).
Online Speech Platforms
The Atlantic: The Secret Internet of TERFs
By Kaitlyn Tiffany
Mary Kate Fain, a 27-year-old engineer and writer living in Houston, has always considered herself a feminist. Growing up…her feminism was…mainstream. In college, however…she became convinced that trans women are men and trans-rights activism is just another weapon of the patriarchy.
Like many, Fain’s political transformation was helped along by the internet…[O]n Reddit she found a forum-or “subreddit”-where tens of thousands of members, predominantly women, were devoted to the insistence that trans women are not women…
For years, r/GenderCritical, the group Fain joined, was the internet’s largest and most recognizable anti-trans space, known on Reddit as a “major pipeline” into TERF ideology. That abruptly changed in June, however, when r/GenderCritical disappeared from Reddit…
Fain framed the ban flatly as persecution. “They use the label hate speech to silence speech they don’t want,” she told me. “Radical feminism does not come from a place of hate, nor anything even remotely near it…” Almost immediately, she joined a core group of r/GenderCritical members in an effort to rebuild what they lost. In about a month, they came up with Ovarit, a new, invite-only Reddit-inspired platform.
There is a case to be made that these communities should not be kicked off major sites in the first place. If you remove a group like r/GenderCritical from Reddit, that group will move on to a more lawless part of the web. The escalation of rhetoric there isn’t slowed by any platform rules, and it also isn’t hemmed in by any dissenting voices, says Luc Cousineau, an internet researcher at the University of Waterloo.
Candidates and Campaigns
The Detroit News: Biden condemned large campaign contributions; then took more than Trump
By Colby Humphrey
Back in 2015, Biden stated that the No. 1 thing he would do as a lawmaker to “increase fairness, equity, [and] opportunity for the middle class” would be to “get private money out of the political process.”
So much for that sentiment. When it came to who had an advantage among the country’s “mega-donors” in 2020, Biden blew the doors off the Trump campaign…[and] it should throw cold water on the idea that any significant changes to the current campaign finance system are on the way…
In some ways, Team Biden did fulfill its vision, raking in over $368 million from individuals donating $200 or less…With this haul and existing rhetoric around money in politics, surely the Biden campaign would have tried to tap the brakes on its reliance on big-money donors in 2020. Right?
Wrong…Biden received more than $580 million from individual contributors giving more than $200, compared to President Trump’s $325 million…
And what about the much-maligned Super-PACs and “dark money” groups? Biden won big here, too. These groups spent nearly $700 million in support of the DNC candidate, compared to $352 million for Trump.
NJ.com Money didn’t buy victory in N.J.’s hottest congressional race, new report shows
By Jonathan D. Salant
Not only did Rep. Jeff Van Drew win re-election last month in New Jersey’s hottest congressional race after switching political parties, he did it after being outspent by almost $1 million.
Newly released Federal Election Commission reports show Democratic nominee Amy Kennedy raised $5 million and spent all most all of it. Van Drew, R-2nd Dist, raised almost $4.3 million and spent $4 million…
Van Drew defeated Kennedy, 52% to 46%, according to the state Division of Elections. While all 12 House members from New Jersey were returned to office, he was the only incumbent outspent by a challenger. His winning percentage, though, was lower than any other federal lawmaker in the state except for rookie Rep. Tom Malinowski, D-7th Dist., according to the Associated Press.
The States
The Washington Post: Christopher Krebs sues Trump campaign, lawyer Joe diGenova for defamation
By Spencer S. Hsu and Dan Morse
The former top U.S. cybersecurity official responsible for securing November’s presidential election sued the Trump campaign and one of its lawyers for defamation Tuesday, asserting that they conspired to falsely claim the election was stolen, attack dissenting Republicans and fraudulently reap political donations.
Christopher Krebs, who was fired Nov. 17 by President Trump after he refuted the president’s claims of widespread election fraud, singled out comments made almost two weeks later by attorney Joseph diGenova, who said Krebs should face the same punishment inflicted on those convicted of treason because he had asserted that the 2020 election was the most secure in history.
“He should be drawn and quartered,” diGenova said on the outlet Newsmax, a third defendant. “Taken out at dawn and shot.”
He also labeled Krebs an “idiot” and a “class-A moron” during the segment, which unleashed a flood of social media comments that left Krebs, his wife and several of their young children in fear for their lives, according to the lawsuit...
The 52-page complaint was filed in Maryland state court in Montgomery County, where diGenova resides. The lawsuit accused diGenova and the Trump campaign of defamation and “intentional infliction of emotional distress.” It labeled Newsmax an aider and abettor. Krebs seeks a jury trial, money and punitive damages and an injunction ordering Newsmax to remove video of the incident.
City & State: The sky’s the limit for Ray McGuire’s fundraising
By Jeff Coltin
With more than six months to go until the mayoral primary, New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer and Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, two of the leading candidates, were fully funded, or close to it. After years of raising money, each had more than $2 million in their campaign accounts, and once the matching funds come in, they are each expected to have somewhere around $7.3 million, the spending limit for anybody taking part in the matching funds program.
Then Ray McGuire came along, and changed the rules of the game. The former vice chair of Citigroup has opted out of taking public funds, which means he isn’t subject to spending limits in the Democratic primary. (Although he still has to stick to a $5,100 per person donation limit.) McGuire’s campaign says he’s already raised more than $2.3 million, and everyone is expecting him to keep on raising – and spending – until he’s well past $7.3 million…
So Stringer and Adams would have to go back to fundraising, if they want to compete with McGuire’s millions. Why was Adams holding indoor fundraisers during the pandemic? Probably because he feels like he now needs more money to compete…
Kathryn Garcia, the former city sanitation commissioner, said that McGuire’s money doesn’t change her game plan…”I know that I can run this campaign efficiently on less. And clearly, money doesn’t necessarily buy elections, or we would have won Florida,” she said, referring to President-elect Joe Biden’s loss in the state despite outspending President Donald Trump.
The Philadelphia Inquirer: Firm ran Pa. senator’s campaign and worked with super PAC to attack opponent, but denies coordination
By Angela Couloumbis and Sam Janesh
As state legislative races go, the one between Republican Sen. John DiSanto and Democrat George Scott was one of the most hotly contested in Pennsylvania’s November election…
And it was an all-out political brawl. DiSanto and Scott spent weeks attacking each other’s policies in a barrage of mailers and television ads. In the closing days of the election, a 15-second anti-Scott ad hit the airwaves, paid for by the Washington-based Republican State Leadership Committee.
Direct coordination between groups like the RSLC, which run so-called super PACs, and political campaigns is forbidden. To create the ad, the group turned to a middleman, the same Harrisburg-based firm running DiSanto’s campaign: Red Maverick Media, headed by the well-connected strategist Ray Zaborney.
No one has accused Zaborney’s firm or RSLC of wrongdoing. But good-government and campaign-finance experts said the arrangement is another example of how weak state and federal campaign-finance rules – combined with meager oversight – create gray areas and loopholes.
