In the News
News Media Alliance: With State Anti-SLAPP Laws in Chaos, New Uniform Legislation Would Offer Consistent Protection for Publishers of Free Speech
By Natalie Seales
Unfortunately, many people seek to punish accountability journalism. This “punishment” can sometimes take the form of costly and frivolous lawsuits called SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) suits. State anti-SLAPP laws give defendants an early motion to dismiss meritless claims, but unfortunately, the laws vary significantly among states and there is no federal anti-SLAPP law. However, there is currently federal legislation under consideration that would help discourage these frivolous lawsuits…
For a more in depth survey of state anti-SLAPP laws, see the recent study by the Institute for Free Speech.
The Courts
Texas Tribune: Third fired professor claims in federal lawsuit that Collin College is censoring political speech
By Kate McGee
History professor Michael Phillips is the third faculty member at Collin College to sue the school alleging retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights to free speech. Phillips’ lawsuit, filed in federal court on Tuesday, says he was fired because he spoke publicly about politically contentious issues like the school’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the removal of Confederate statues in Dallas.
Congress
Washington Post: Inside the Jan. 6 committee’s effort to trace every dollar raised and spent based on Trump’s false election claims
By Josh Dawsey, Jacqueline Alemany and Tom Hamburger
[The House Jan. 6 committee] has also been focused on another part of its inquiry that panel members said is of equal importance to the success of the investigation — tracing every dollar that was raised and spent on false claims that the election was stolen…
The primary objective is to determine whether email solicitations spreading false claims of election fraud served as a powerful source of misinformation, prompting the need to make proposals for strengthening campaign finance laws…
Investigators in recent months have increased their focus on the vast digital fundraising efforts around overturning the election, trying to pinpoint if the Trump campaign and allied Republicans were engaged in a coordinated effort to raise money on fraudulent and misleading appeals, according to people involved in the probe…
“When you roll a possible fraud case in with the sponsorship of public rallies and demonstrations about an election, you face serious First Amendment implications,” [Stanley Brand, who is representing former Trump White House aide Dan Scavino] said…
One select committee aide familiar with the money investigation said it is imperative that the committee provide an understanding of how all the different entities raised and used money to better understand what laws applied to the various fundraising efforts.
“There’s a difference between political speech and a campaign issuing language versus an organization like a 501(c) (4), and what do they say,” said a select committee aide, referring to the tax code shorthand for social welfare groups that are not required to disclose their donors. “Looking at different rules for the different entities and how different buckets of money are raised is really important.”
Slate: How Supreme Court Radicalism Could Threaten Democracy Itself
By Richard L. Hasen
Although law is only part of the answer to how to deal with this crisis in election legitimacy, it is an important piece…
For example, our current laws requiring disclosure of funding of large-scale campaign activity are woefully inadequate. Today, if someone runs a television ad supporting a candidate for president or Congress coming through on a cable television box or DirecTV satellite feed, federal law requires disclosure of the ad’s funders. But if that same ad comes through Hulu or YouTube TV or appears via Facebook, the ad is not covered unless it explicitly calls for a vote for or against a candidate because our laws have not been updated to deal with technological change.
International
Wall Street Journal: These Campaigns Hope ‘Deepfake’ Candidates Help Get Out the Vote
By Timothy W. Martin and Dasl Yoon
The so-called AI Yoon—as in Artificial Intelligence Yoon—sounds, looks and gestures much like the real-life, conservative politician who is in a close race for South Korea’s presidential election on Wednesday—although with much more mischievous humor.
A sharp-tongued former prosecutor, the 61-year-old Mr. Yoon is new to politics and wanted an efficient way to reach out to the electorate. He needed to pursue young voters and sought a softer public image, and had just roughly three weeks to officially campaign by law…
More than 80 clips of Mr. Yoon’s digital self have been shared on social media, attracting more than 70,000 comments since making a debut in January…
The AI technology is often called “deepfake.” It generally refers to videos or images that use technology to falsely portray people saying or doing things.
The South Korean incarnation is more sophisticated than the traditional tactics of dropping in face swaps or voice impersonations. Mr. Yoon’s digital twin is controlled by his campaign team, drawn from hours of audio and video he recorded himself.
Democratic Party officials initially blasted AI Yoon, calling the deepfake fraudulent and a threat to democracy. But soon after, an AI version of Lee Jae-myung emerged.
The States
Deadline: Judge Rejects Fox News’ Motion To Dismiss Smartmatic Defamation Lawsuit
By Ted Johnson
A New York judge rejected Fox News’ efforts to dismiss a $2.7 billion lawsuit filed by Smartmatic, which sued over the network’s amplification of unfounded claims that it rigged the 2020 presidential election…
Smartmatic sued Fox News and other defendants in February, claiming that the network’s personalities pushed the narrative that the election was rigged in an effort to boost ratings.
“Even assuming that Fox News did not intentionally allow this false narrative to be broadcasted, there is a substantial basis for plaintiffs’ claim that, at a minimum, Fox News turned a blind eye to a litany of outrageous claims about plaintiffs, unprecedented in the history of American elections, so inherently improbable that it evinced a reckless disregard for the truth,” [Judge David] Cohen wrote in his 61-page opinion. (Read it here).
Fox News Media plans to appeal.
“While we are gratified that Judge Cohen dismissed Smartmatic’s claims against Jeanine Pirro at this early stage, we still plan to appeal the ruling immediately,” the company said in a statement. “We will also continue to litigate these baseless claims by filing a counterclaim for fees and costs under New York’s anti-SLAPP statute to prevent the full-blown assault on the First Amendment which stands in stark contrast to the highest tradition of American journalism.”
Minnesota Session Daily: Elections panel OKs bill with aim to shed ‘more sunshine’ on independent campaign expenditures
By Mike Cook
Transparency is a goal of an elections bill receiving committee approval. Still, the vote was almost along party lines.
Sponsored by Rep. Jamie Long (DFL-Mpls), HF3190, as amended twice, aims to “provide some more sunshine and disclosure” to help voters know who is behind independent expenditures trying to influence elections by requiring a disclosure of the top three largest donors of independent expenditures on ads.
“It does not stop any speech, does not curtail any speech,” Long said. “All it does is help voters make better informed choices.”
A disclaimer exemption for online banner ads and electronic communications would disappear under the proposed legislation.
Approved 8-4 by the House State Government Finance and Elections Committee Tuesday, the bill’s next stop is the House Ways and Means Committee.
