The Courts

Washington Post: New York Times writer grilled for hours on second day of Palin libel trial

By Sarah Ellison

Attorneys spent the second day of Sarah Palin’s defamation trial against the New York Times grilling the author of an erroneous editorial in sometimes excruciating detail — going so far as to probe her reading habits more than a decade ago, and at one point prompting the judge to consult a dictionary.

It’s the first libel case against the Times to go to trial in 18 years, and it is a test of decades of broad legal protections for news organizations writing about public figures.

Online Speech Platforms

Bloomberg: Facebook Parent Meta Rethinks Election Ads Ban Ahead of 2022 Midterms

By Naomi Nix and Anna Edgerton

Facebook owner Meta Platforms Inc. is rethinking its policy of banning new political advertisements in the final days before an election, part of its preparation for the 2022 midterms, according to a person familiar with the matter. 

Meta employees in recent days have been re-evaluating how that policy was executed during the 2020 U.S. election and whether there were potential unintended consequences, said the person, who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record. No final decisions have been made about whether the policy will change, the person said…

One thing that Meta employees might look at are the factors that that determine what qualifies as a new ad. Campaigns that wanted to change their ad from “don’t forget to vote next week” to “don’t forget to vote tomorrow” were considered to be putting out a new ad under the old policy, the person said. 

Trump had ads removed that said “vote today” that he had uploaded a week earlier, presumably to sidestep the pre-election ban. 

Independent Groups

New York Post: Democrats complaining about a ‘war on democracy’ are actually the ones waging it

By David Harsanyi

Democrats have spent years sanctimoniously whining about the twin evils of “dark money” and “gerrymandering,” arguing that unfairly manipulating congressional districts and accepting anonymous money threatens the soul of American democracy.

Yet their hypocrisy is on full display when it comes to both. Start with the purportedly nefarious impact of “dark money,” which refers to anonymous funds donated to nonprofit organizations that work to influence the political process.

A recent New York Times analysis found that 15 of the biggest nonprofit groups that fund Democratic Party causes had dropped $1.5 billion on the 2020 presidential election to get Joe Biden elected — or $600 million more than Republican groups…

Where is Sheldon Whitehouse, the most vociferous critic of anonymous money influencing the courts, now that “grimy swamps of dark money influence” are here to help Democrats? The Rhode Island senator, just one of many hypocrites in that body, won’t even answer questions about the dark money he accepted from a Providence green-energy outfit named Utilidata.

Breitbart: Schumer-Aligned Group Brought in Record $92M in Dark Money from Anonymous Donors

By Jordan Dixon-Hamilton

A dark money group aligned with Democrat Senate Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) brought in a record $92 million in dark money from anonymous donors while Schumer blasted Republicans for using dark money…

During the 2020 election cycle, Majority Forward gave Schumer’s Senate Majority PAC $51 million in contributions, making it the largest donor to Schumer’s PAC.

While Schumer benefitted from millions of dark money dollars, he criticized Republicans for doing the same thing. Schumer also pushed the Senate to pass the For the People Act, which contains provisions requiring political nonprofits to disclose donors who contribute more than $10,000.

The States

Associated Press: Judge strikes parts of heavily amended campaign finance bill

By Amy Beth Hanson

Montana’s Republican-controlled Legislature violated the state Constitution, a judge has ruled, when it changed a campaign finance bill late in the 2021 session to make it harder to register and to encourage college students to vote and to, in effect, limit donations to judicial campaigns.

District Court Judge Mike Menahan on Thursday granted a permanent injunction preventing the state from enforcing the two provisions that were added to Senate Bill 319 during a conference committee — with no public input — a day before the Legislature adjourned…

The late amendments included one to prohibit political committees from conducting voter registration, ballot signature gathering, ballot collection efforts or turn-out-the-vote efforts inside a residence hall, dining facility or athletic facility on public college campuses.

The other called for judges to recuse themselves if an attorney or party in a case before them made more than 50% of the maximum allowed donation to their campaign within the previous six years.

The Montana Democratic Party and others have filed a federal complaint against the restrictions on college political activity contained in SB319. The complaint calls the legislation an attack on previous years’ successful efforts “and increased political power of Montana’s youngest voters,” and argues the law violates free speech and voting rights.

That case is still pending.

Virginia Mercury: Political power shifts in Richmond but resistance to campaign finance limits remains the same

By Graham Moomaw

The record-breaking sums spent in last year’s governor’s race — more than $135 million combined between Youngkin and his Democratic opponent, former Gov. Terry McAuliffe — didn’t inspire the General Assembly to seriously consider broader limits on money in state politics, covering all corporations, interest groups and individual donors…

“I’m really stunned,” said Nancy Morgan, an organizer with the citizen advocacy group MoneyOutVA, which has seen 15 of the 23 reform bills it’s tracking die in the session’s first weeks. “It’s a good thing we’ve got a five-year plan.” …

A handful of bills meant to boost transparency in political spending are still alive.

Some require more disclosure for PAC spending and ads clearly meant to erode a candidate’s support without explicitly telling people to vote against them.

Daily Sun: Florida law would ban targeted picketing, North Port influenced that push

By Craig Garrett

Florida lawmakers would ban forms of public protest because of what North Port experienced in September.

A bill working through state Senate chambers would, if adopted, limit so-called targeted picketing, a form of protest outside the homes of public officials, even private citizens.

Such protests last year occurred in North Port at the Wabasso Avenue house of Chris and Roberta Laundrie, parents of Brian Laundrie, the travel companion and fiance of Gabrielle “Gabby” Petito, for example. Sarasota County school board member Shirley Brown also had anti-mask protesters picketing her Sarasota home in October. Those protesters had lights and sirens, Brown had said…

The Senate bill, co-sponsored by Keith Perry, a Gainesville Republican, and Jim Boyd, a Bradenton Republican, were debated Thursday in a Criminal Justice Committee hearing. It would likely take affect this summer, if signed into law.

Court challenges are likely, however, as public assembly is a civil right, advocates argue. Misdemeanor violators would face fines and jail.