First Amendment News

YouTube plans to to eliminate thousands of videos and channels dedicated to neo-Nazi and white supremacist content. The ban would include kooky videos denying that events like the Sandy Hook Elementary School took place. YouTube said it wanted to prevent its platform from being used to promote “hatred, harassment, discrimination and violence.” YouTube is under fire for allowing hate and racism, and at the same time President Donald Trump and his followers criticize the social

ustice Department prosecutors are refusing to honor a judge’s order to release secret transcripts of conversations between former national security adviser Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak after the Obama administration had slapped sanctions on Russia for interfering in the 2016 presidential election. Federal district judge Emmet G. Sullivan ordered the release in a rare request for a secret wiretap of foreign officials. (The New York Times, May 31, 2019, by Adam Goldman)

The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that a Montana government employee privacy law failed to distinguish between personal information and acts that may be illegal or unethical. The dispute involved an ethics complaint filed by legislator Brad Tschida concerning a alleged misuse of a state-owned airplane in 2014 by Democratic Governor Steve Bullock and an unelected aide, a complaint that Tschidas wanted released to the public. (Courthouse News Service, May 29, 2019, by Mathew Renda)

In response to the federal grand jury indictment of WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange under the Espionage Act, the RCFP answers eight frequently asked questions on the charges including “Does it mater if Julian Assange is a journalist?” and “Does the First Amendment apply to the publication of government secrets?” The RCFP then offers an extended analysis of the charges and  general allegations. (Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, May 30, 2019, by Gabe Rottman)

In indicting WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange, the U.S. government has embarked on an unprecedented use of the espionage charge, never before brought against publishers of stolen secret documents. The government is expected to argue that Assange encouraged the leaks, damaged national security and is not truly a journalist. Assange’s defense team may refer to the Supreme Court ruling that publication of legally obtained information is protected even if the information was obtained by unlawful means and