First Amendment News

Former whistleblower John Tye says it’s the golden age of whistleblowing but that the practice can be risky and gratuitous. Tyle co-founded the nonprofit law firm Whistleblower Aid to help whistleblowers perform crucial public service without breaking the law. Tye says some of the greatest threats to democracy today are hidden from view and involve the control and misuse of information. (Vox, September 25, 2019, by Eric Johnson) Middlebury College professor Allison Stanger, The Atlantic,

Facebook said it would allow politicians leeway in violating the platform’s rules since political speech is newsworthy and should be given wide dissemination. Facebook does not currently submit speech from politicians to fact-checking unless the speech endangers life or involves advertising. The company requires all advertisers to honor Facebook rules on hate speech and extremism. (The Hill, September 24, 2019, by Emily Birnbaum) Twitter has a similar policy. Before the 2020 elections, Facebook is trying

The European Union’s Court of Justice ruled that Google had the right to only honor the “right to be forgotten” law in the union’s member states. Google may still keep personal information of European citizens in search engines in other nations. The court said that many countries did not recognize a right to be forgotten. “… the right to the protection of personal data is not an absolute right,” read the ruling, “but must be

President Donald Trump lost a key battle in his vendetta against the press as a federal court ordered his administration to restore journalist Brian Karem’s security credentials given the lack of specific rules for the press covering the White House. Karem had earlier won a temporary restoration of his pass pending a final decision in federal court. The case helps to clarify the law concerning press passes and the First Amendment. (Reporters Committee for Freedom

The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that conservative University of Michigan students can pursue their lawsuit against the Bias Response Team that they say prevents students from discussing controversial topics like immigration and Black Lives Matter. Even though the team cannot exact any punishment, the court ruled that the team “acts by way of implicit threat of punishment and intimidation to quell speech.” (Courthouse News Service, September 23, 2019, by Jeff D. Gorman)