Supreme Court
Law360: Supreme Court Won’t Hear Journalists’ AB 5 Challenge
By Max Kutner
The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to review whether a California worker classification law runs afoul of free speech protections, a case that might have led to a potential narrowing or or blessing of the controversial Golden State law.
[Ed. note: The Institute for Free Speech filed an amicus brief in support of petitioners in the case, American Society of Journalists and Authors et al. v. Bonta. Read it here.]
The Courts
Courthouse News: Mischief managed
The Sixth Circuit agrees that a Michigan city manager’s posting about his job on his personal Facebook page did not transform it into a government page, so his decision to block a critical citizen from his page did not violate the critic’s First Amendment rights.
Read the ruling here.
Congress
Politico: Opinion: What Cassidy Hutchinson Said that Could Prove Trump’s Criminal Undoing
By Renato Mariotti
In addition, a prosecution of Trump for inciting violence would face a serious First Amendment hurdle. The Supreme Court has long held that only incitement to “imminent unlawful action” is sufficient. The speaker had to know that the crowd would immediately break the law.
Courts have routinely set this bar very high in the context of political speech because the First Amendment broadly protects speech of that type. A political statement by the president of the United States would be presumptively protected by the First Amendment.
But now we have Hutchinson’s testimony that Trump said he didn’t “f—ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me” and that they would be going to the Capitol later. This is precisely the sort of “smoking gun” evidence needed to prove that the person speaking meant to incite imminent violence.
FEC
Casper Star-Tribune: Nonprofit files complaint over shadowy donation to anti-Cheney super PAC
By Victoria Eavis
A nonprofit government watchdog organization filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission last week against a brand new Wyoming-based limited liability company that made a $50,000 donation to a super PAC working to unseat Rep. Liz Cheney.
The complaint alleges that Snow Goose LLC’s donation to a pro-Harriet Hageman super PAC, Wyoming Values, is in violation of the “straw donor” rule, which prohibits companies and individuals from giving someone else money to make a political donation on their behalf.
Free Expression
The Conversation: Donating to help women get abortions is a First Amendment right – protected by Supreme Court precedents
By Lucinda M. Finley
Several Texas abortion funds – which are charities that help people who can’t afford to get an abortion pay for their travel, lodging and medical bills – paused disbursements on June 24, 2022, after the Supreme Court ruled that Americans have no constitutional right to the procedure…
Some funds active in Texas made this decision based on concerns that their financial assistance to women seeking abortions may now be illegal in that state, as well as fears that their donors could also be sued for violating Texas law.
But as an expert on reproductive rights and First Amendment law who has argued before the Supreme Court, I believe that donating to abortion funds – even in places where helping people get abortions is illegal – is protected by the U.S. Constitution.
Online Speech Platforms
Axios: Nobelist Maria Ressa: Social media is corroding U.S. democracy
By Sara Kehaulani Goo
The U.S. is “far worse off than you think” when it comes to social media undermining its democracy, Nobel Peace Prize laureate and journalist Maria Ressa told Axios…
“Online violence is real-world violence,” Ressa says, citing incidents around the world, including the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol and recent mass shootings by radicalized killers.
She argues nations need to require accountability for tech firms like Meta, which owns Facebook, and Twitter…
When asked what advice she’d give to Elon Musk, who is in the process of buying Twitter, Ressa cautioned the billionaire about the consequences of unchecked free speech.
“There’s a reason why, when news organizations were gatekeepers, we had standards and transparency. Free speech unchecked is like a person yelling fire and there’s not a fire. Free speech at all costs has costs.”
Independent Groups
Norman Transcript: Clean up Oklahoma criticized not disclosing source of funding
By Janelle Stecklein
Armed with mops and buckets and their trademark “Clean It Up Truck,” members of Clean Up Oklahoma admit they make a bit of spectacle as they travel across the state bringing attention to their anti-corruption platform…
The group is pressuring candidates for statewide office to sign what they call their “Anti-Corruption Pledge.”
It requires candidates to promise, among other things, to clean up elections by getting “big money out of politics” and requires officials to be transparent with things such as their tax returns, conflicts of interest and gifts. Candidates who sign the pledge also promise to stop politicians, their families and staff from “cashing in at the taxpayers’ expense,” create an independent and transparent redistricting commission and guarantee they won’t put any restrictions on voters who want to use existing laws to place citizen-led ballot referendums before voters.
But Clean Up Oklahoma, which reports spending $30,400 on electioneering efforts since June 9, is not disclosing any of its donors.
The States
New Jersey Monitor: Progressive, labor groups urge Democratic leaders to abandon campaign finance bill
By Nikita Biryukov
A coalition of progressive, environmental, and labor groups are urging Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin and Gov. Phil Murphy to stop a plan that would radically change New Jersey’s campaign finance law.
In a Tuesday letter to the two Democratic leaders, 25 groups — including the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice, Communications Workers of America Local 1032, and Service Employees International Union 32BJ — asked the powerful Democrats to step back from a bill that appears poised to pass the full Senate on Wednesday.
“Ironically, at the same time as our elected leaders are promising a renewed focus on ‘affordability,’ this bill would drive up costs for taxpayers by removing checks on corruption and government spending that benefits politically connected companies,” they said in the letter.
The bill, sponsored by Senate President Nicholas Scutari (D-Union), Senate Minority Leader Steve Oroho (R-Sussex), and Assembly Majority Leader Lou Greenwald (D-Camden), would double contribution limits for political candidates, party organizations, and other types of political committees.
The measure would exempt contributions to political parties and legislative leadership committees from the list of those that could bar a firm from securing public contracts, and it would prevent municipalities from enacting their own pay-to-play rules, a move advocates have argued effectively guts the state’s anti-corruption law.
Washington Post: Baker paused his bid, rivals sought his endorsement. Why hasn’t it come?
By Ovetta Wiggins
Former Prince George’s county executive Rushern L. Baker III said earlier this month that he was pausing his bid to become Maryland’s next governor and would take a week to decide if he should officially drop out and endorse a rival.
That was nearly three weeks ago. His next steps are unclear as a primary date looms with his name still on the ballot, and as his campaign continues to file for tax dollars from the state through Maryland’s public campaign financing system, records show.
Baker, the only gubernatorial candidate participating in public financing, decided to suspend his campaign after reporting a little more than $11,000 in his coffers this month, facing the reality of having to ask staffers to go unpaid and accumulating additional campaign debt…
If he decides to bow out of the race, the choice would set up the state’s first legal test of whether a candidate who has received taxpayer money to run can endorse another candidate.
Jared DeMarinis, the state board of election’s director of campaign finance, said: “The legislation that was passed and enacted did not contemplate this type of situation. I believe the next General Assembly will probably address that scenario.”
Joanne Antoine, executive director of Common Cause Maryland, said Baker also faces another dilemma: If he withdraws, he would be required to return the matching funds he received. So far, he has received nearly $1 million from the state.
