The Courts
Courthouse News: Judge Keeps Virus-Relief Funds Out of Reach of Lobbyists
By Megan Mineiro
Political lobbyists may have been hit as hard as other sectors by the virus pandemic, but that doesn’t justify giving them a slice of the government aid pie, a federal judge ruled.
“These are trying times. Businesses and individuals of all trades are suffering from the detrimental effects of this pandemic,” U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth wrote. “But the court is bound by existing precedent and cannot enjoin a constitutionally valid regulation on account of financial hardship.”
Released late Tuesday, the ruling came just a day after the Washington court heard arguments via teleconference that the multibillion-dollar CARES Act, short for Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security, unconstitutionally excludes lobbyists and political consultants.
Claiming that they are in dire need of the congressional funds to keep business afloat, a trade group for the industry and the firm Ridder/Braden claimed in a federal complaint last week that the program infringes their free-speech rights…
Lamberth said that lobbyists failed to show that their financial hardship is irreparable, saying that the inability of firms to access federal loans does not directly translate into the Small Business Association putting a curb on political speech.
Law 360: Lobbyists Take Fight Over Virus Relief Ban To DC Circ.
By Khorri Atkinson
A trade association of political consultants took their bid demanding access to COVID-19 relief loans to the D.C. Circuit on Wednesday, less than a day after a federal judge refused to force the Trump administration to allow them to tap into a multibillion-dollar loan program.
The American Association of Political Consultants, which lost its request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the U.S. Small Business Administration, offered no details of the appeal in a one-page notice filed with the appellate court.
Holtzman Vogel Josefiak Torchinsky PLLC partner Jason Torchinsky, an AAPC attorney, told Law360 in an email that he’s hoping the appeals court will grant an expedited review and that “small businesses cannot wait while the government plays favorites.”
FCC
Multichannel News: FCC Will Apply Reasonableness Standard to Station Political File Disclosure Decisions
By John Eggerton
The FCC says it will, indeed, apply a “standard of reasonableness and good faith decision-making” to broadcasters when it comes to deciding what political ads trigger disclosure requirements, and that the disclosure requirement clarification applies only to issue ads.
That came in a response to a request that it reconsider its Political File Order.
NAB joined with Hearst Television, Graham Media Group, Nexstar, Fox, Tegna and Scripps to ask the FCC to clarify its political ad rules clarification and give them that reasonableness standard given that deciding what to disclose for what ad left room for interpretation.
The FCC issued the guidance as part of the resolution of complaints about TV station political ad disclosures, or the lack of them. The FCC admonished the stations and issued the guidance.
First Amendment
RealClearPolitics: COVID Protests: First Amendment Is an ‘Essential’ Service
By Dan Backer
Yes, the coronavirus is serious. And, yes, we need to take social distancing seriously. We are in the midst of a public health crisis, and it is incumbent upon individual Americans to give the COVID-19 pandemic the attention it deserves…
But there is a difference between individuals making sacrifices on their own and the government forcing us to sacrifice our essential liberty…
This is not an excuse to be irresponsible, but neither is it an excuse to exercise anti-American police power. The right to protest is profoundly American, as anti-Trump protesters often tell us. A man lit himself on fire outside the Pentagon to protest the Vietnam War. Thousands of millennials gathered in parks to “occupy Wall Street.”
Hundreds of thousands worldwide joined the 2017 Women’s March. Apparently, the right to protest only matters when it beats up on President Trump.
Politics aside, the First Amendment is a fundamental and protected right. In fact, freedom of speech is fundamental because it is protected in good times and bad. The bad times are precisely when free speech is needed most. We need more speech – and, yes, more protest – to come to a consensus about the pandemic, and how to respond in the weeks to come.
Anything less is government tyranny. Let’s be clear: Freedom of speech is “essential.”
By Jake Laperruque
Recent American history shows significant abuses of surveillance powers that targeted individuals based on race, religious affiliation, and political activity. Facial recognition could easily be exploited to target individuals in the same way.
Unrestricted, facial recognition could allow law enforcement to scan crowds during large protests, political events, or religious ceremonies, and catalog individuals’ engagement in these First Amendment-protected activities. Using facial recognition with no restrictions to curb abuse presents the potential that discretion could become a tool for selective prosecution. The ability to effortlessly pull up potential facial recognition matches for individuals with an active bench warrant for a low-level offense has in fact already led to abusive targeting, such as against individuals attending protests, political events, and religious ceremonies. Several years ago, Baltimore police used facial recognition amid protests to find individuals with “outstanding warrants and arrest[ed] them directly from the crowd,” in a selective effort that appeared to be aimed at disrupting, punishing, and discouraging demonstrators from protesting…
Even without abuse occurring, the mere ability to collect and freely use this type of highly personal and sensitive information could chill participation in political, religious, and a variety of other constitutionally protected activities.
The majority of top public colleges and universities use a blacklist of secret words, created by Facebook, to automatically censor comments on university social media pages, according to a new survey from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. As campuses sit empty and much of student life moves online, this censorship has an amplified importance…
The findings, gleaned from public records from nearly 200 top institutions, show that public universities – bound by the First Amendment – are impermissibly censoring public dialogue…
A number of institutions…blocked the names of political candidates, such as “Trump,” “Bernie,” or “Hillary.”
During protests over the “Silent Sam” Confederate monument, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill blocked posts containing the phrase “Silent Sam,” as well as mentions of “Nazis.” …
Texas A&M blocked terms “peta” and “abuse” to frustrate criticism by animal rights activists, including People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, over research conducted on dogs. Santa Monica College likewise bars “cats,” “dissecting,” “torture,” and “killing” following a PETA campaign criticizing cat dissection…
The University of New Hampshire blocked a Twitter account belonging to “UNH Students for Gary Johnson,” a Libertarian Party presidential candidate…
The University of Alaska Anchorage blocked an “Alaskans4Trump” account.
Free Speech
New York Times: ‘This Government is Lucky’: Coronavirus Quiets Global Protest Movements
By Vivian Wang, Maria Abi-Habib and Vivian Yee
Tear gas no longer chokes Hong Kong’s skyscrapers, while protesters’ tents in downtown Beirut have been dismantled. In Delhi, the odd plastic fork and tattered blanket are all that remain of the sit-in that once throttled one of the city’s busiest highways.
Around the globe, the coronavirus pandemic has stilled the anti-establishment protests that erupted last year, bringing months of marches, rallies and riots to a sudden halt. Now, like everything else in the world, the protests face the unanswerable question of what happens next…
The challenges are apparent. Millions of protesters are hunkered down at home, hemmed in by sweeping quarantines and fears for their own health. The daily burden of acquiring face masks or food overshadows debates about corruption and abuse of power.
Almost every government has restricted mass gatherings, ostensibly protecting public health but potentially also constraining future mobilization. Some have used the outbreak to consolidate power or arrest opponents…
Protesters have also found new ways to express their discontent. Chilean activists have projected images of crowds onto empty streets. In Hong Kong, a union of medical workers, born out of the pro-democracy protests, went on strike to criticize the government’s outbreak response. Worldwide, people have organized online workshops, banged pots and pans and organized socially-distanced rallies.
Online Speech Platforms
KFOX14: Facebook to label national origin of some political posts
By Barbara Ortutay, AP
Facebook said it will label some election-related posts with their geographic origin in an attempt to curb political misinformation by foreign-based pages that mimic legitimate groups and political parties.
The new policy will apply to popular election-related pages, and will stamp every post they make on Facebook and Instagram with its origin. For instance, an Instagram account targeting U.S. voters but based in Brazil will have every post labeled with “Based in Brazil.” Users then can swipe to find out more information about the account…
Facebook will initially target pages based outside of the U.S. that reach a large number of people inside the U.S. The labels, the company says, will help people “gauge the reliability and authenticity” of what they see.
Politico: ‘We wanted to be incredibly aggressive with this’
By Zack Stanton
In an interview for a special coronavirus-focused episode of POLITICO’s Women Rule podcast, Facebook vice president Fidji Simo maintained that the company’s approach to coronavirus is in accord with its “long-lasting policy that we would take down content that can lead to imminent harm,” said Simo. “And that policy is something we have applied in this situation by working closely with the CDC and the WHO to understand which claims and which types of behaviors they would consider could lead to imminent harm.”
Simo said Facebook has worked “closely” on the topic with the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in order to “understand which claims and which types of behaviors they would consider could lead to imminent harm.”
“The imminent harm is very real and very tangible,” Simo said. “It remains an extremely difficult space to navigate because we are very committed to freedom of speech. But at the same time, there are some spaces and times where it’s also really important to keep people safe – and this time, in particular, is a time where we wanted to be incredibly aggressive with this.”
Reuters: Exclusive: Facebook agreed to censor posts after Vietnam slowed traffic – sources
By James Pearson
Facebook’s local servers in Vietnam were taken offline early this year, slowing local traffic to a crawl until it agreed to significantly increase the censorship of “anti-state” posts for local users, two sources at the company told Reuters…
The restrictions, which the sources said were carried out by state-owned telecommunications companies, knocked the servers offline for around seven weeks, meaning the website became unusable at times.
“We believe the action was taken to place significant pressure on us to increase our compliance with legal takedown orders when it comes to content that our users in Vietnam see,” the first of the two Facebook sources told Reuters.
In an emailed statement, Facebook confirmed it had reluctantly complied with the government’s request to “restrict access to content which it has deemed to be illegal”…
Commenting on the Reuters report, human rights group Amnesty International called on Facebook to immediately reverse its decision.
“Facebook’s compliance with these demands sets a dangerous precedent. Governments around the world will see this as an open invitation to enlist Facebook in the service of state censorship,” the group said in a statement on Wednesday.
Candidates and Campaigns
Wall Street Journal: Mike Bloomberg, the $1 Billion Man
By The Editorial Board
So much for the progressive meme about “buying elections.” Federal disclosures Monday finally revealed the full bill for Mike Bloomberg’s Democratic primary bid: more than $1 billion, for hardly three months of official campaigning. For comparison, that’s more than either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton spent during the whole of the 2016 race.
In the progressive worldview, America should be preparing for the inevitable Bloomberg inauguration, since campaign spending supposedly works on voters like a Jedi mind trick. “Some people have figured out,” Elizabeth Warren told a crowd last year, “it’d be a lot cheaper to spend a few hundred mil just buying the presidency, instead of paying that 2 cent wealth tax.”
This rhetoric looks even more whackadoodle in retrospect. Mr. Bloomberg is now $1 billion poorer, with nothing to show for it except some debate footage stored on his TiVo, and maybe a lousy Bloomberg 2020 T-shirt…
By the way, where was the progressive outcry last month when Mr. Bloomberg said he would transfer $18 million in unspent campaign funds to the Democratic National Committee? That’s 500 times the usual limit on what an individual donor can give to his national party’s general account…
The consistent position to take is that campaign-finance laws haven’t purged money from politics. They’ve merely funneled it into less-accountable channels like super PACs, while weakening the parties so much that outsiders, like Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, can try to mount hostile takeovers. If Mr. Bloomberg gives $18 million to the Democratic Party, so what? The scandal is that nobody else can.
The States
Times of San Diego: San Diego Woman Facing Fine, Jail Over COVID-19 Protest Plans 2nd Rally
By Ken Stone
Two days after the Rev. Shane Harris called on San Diego police to cite organizers of Saturday’s “freedom rally” against COVID-19 orders, a San Diego woman has been notified she’s facing a $1,000 fine or jail time.
Naomi Soria, 27, on Wednesday confirmed she was facing penalties for the downtown protest that drew hundreds. Later, she announced another rally this Sunday in Pacific Beach. Soria also goes by Naomi Israel on Facebook and Naomi Castaneda…
The San Diego Police Department confirmed it has contacted the City Attorney’s Office “requesting their review to issue charges against the protest organizer for violating the county health order by organizing a gathering,” City News Service reported…
[Soria’s attorney Harmeet Dhillon] called it outrageous that her client was being charged with a crime for taking part in constitutionally protected activity.
“The right to assemble and to petition the government does not exist if there are topics that are off limit,” she said…
On Monday, a joint police-sheriff statement said: “While no citations were issued at the protests, that does not mean prosecution will not be sought, especially to the organizers of these events.”
Sacramento Bee: CHP bans protests at California Capitol after rally against Newsom’s stay-at-home order
By Sam Stanton
Following Monday’s protest at the state Capitol where demonstrators defied Gov. Gavin Newsom’s orders banning large gatherings, the California Highway Patrol says it will no longer issue permits for events at any state properties, including the Capitol.
“Permits are issued to provide safe environments for demonstrators to express their views,” the CHP said in a statement. “In this case, the permit for the convoy was issued with the understanding that the protest would be conducted in a manner consistent with the state’s public health guidance. That is not what occurred, and CHP will take this experience into account when considering permits for this or any other group.”
Monday’s protest, which mirrored others that have sprung up nationwide and have been dubbed “Operation Gridlock,” featured hundreds of people driving vehicles around the Capitol complex in downtown Sacramento honking horns and hundreds of others standing shoulder to shoulder cheering them on as they expressed opposition to the governor’s stay-at-home order.
Willamette Week: Portland City Elections Officer Issues Unusual Rebuke of Mayor Ted Wheeler
By Nigel Jaquiss
For an experienced politician who has previously run successfully for Multnomah County chairman, state treasure and mayor, Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler is struggling with the mechanics of his campaign for re-election.
Yesterday, City Election Officer Deborah Scroggin notified Wheeler’s campaign that it was in violation of city elections rules requiring disclosure of its major contributors on its campaign websites and social media feeds.
Wheeler’s campaign manager, Amy Rathfelder, said the campaign would fix the problem. But hours later, in a televised candidate debate, Wheeler said other campaigns were guilty of the same violations.
This afternoon, Scroggin took the unusual step of issuing a statement correcting Wheeler’s claims.
“Yesterday, during a televised Portland mayoral candidate debate, Mayor Ted Wheeler incorrectly stated requirements of the City’s voter-adopted campaign regulations,” Scroggin wrote.”Not every candidate is in violation of the regulations, as stated. For example, some candidates don’t have larger donors or political committees to disclose and certain campaign signs are exempt. Guidance was given to each candidate, including the Mayor, at the time they qualified to appear on the ballot about the basics of disclosure requirements and the various communication channels requiring disclosures.”
Daily Business Review: Uh-Oh: Florida Anti-Mask Law Originally Aimed at the KKK Now ‘Theoretically Makes Us All Criminals’
By Raychel Lean
For most Floridians, wearing a face mask in public has become an acceptable new norm amid concerns about contracting COVID-19.
But for [Fort Lauderdale attorney Bruce] Rogow, it’s an amusing reminder of a Florida Supreme Court case he had won for a Ku Klux Klan member convicted for covering his face with a white hood. It’s also a reminder of a current Florida mask statute that the attorney says “theoretically makes us all criminals” amid the coronavirus pandemic.
That law, Florida Statute 876.12, governs criminal anarchy, treason and public order crimes.
It says, “No person or persons over 16 years of age shall, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, enter upon, or be or appear upon any lane, walk, alley, street, road, highway, or other public way in this state.”
The law used to be broader, blocking anyone from wearing a mask on public property – until Rogow and the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida appealed the conviction of Pensacola Ku Klux Klan member B.W. Robinson in 1980.
