Mediaboss Marketing

Big Walnut Local Schools and a parent suing the district for allegedly violating her First Amendment rights filed a joint motion in U.S. District Court asking a judge to stay upcoming deadlines as they may be close to a resolution in the case.

The lawsuit was filed on March 7 by Big Walnut parent Ashley Ryder after she was told to zip it at a meeting by Board President Doug Crowl on Feb. 17. Ryder claimed in her lawsuit that her First Amendment right to free speech was violated when she was told to stop talking and when her public participation was cut short by Crowl, who was presiding over the meeting.

(Crowl) retaliated against Ryder when (Crowl) silenced her criticisms, would not let her finish her statements, and ordered her to leave the lectern, the complaint said. Defendant further intended to chill Ryders future speech and others speech when President Crowl told the audience that he would not permit further criticisms of Defendants Board members. Thus, the Defendant has threatened and intimidated Plaintiff and other members of the public from exercising their First Amendment rights.

The first hearing in the case was scheduled for 9 a.m. May 4, but on April 5, the parties filed a joint motion asking for the hearing to be stayed because a resolution to the case may be near.

The parties have reached a tentative resolution and are working on finalizing the details of the resolution, the joint motion said. To give the parties time to finalize the resolution, the parties seek a 30-day stay of these current deadlines and dates, such that the parties will file their stipulated injunction and dismissal entry by May 20, 2022, or will provide the Court with an update by that date.

The motion was granted the next day by Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley, who ordered that a stipulated injunction, a dismissal entry or a joint status report be filed by May 20.

There have been no filings in the case since the motion was approved.

At a special board meeting on March 15, the Big Walnut Board of Education reviewed its meeting policy and suspended enforcement of part of the policy that restricts abusive, personally directed or antagonistic speech until such time that the policy can be reviewed and amended and for no less than 60 days.

The board meets next at 6:30 p.m. April 21.

Glenn Battishill can be reached at 740-413-0903 or on Twitter @BattishillDG.

See the rest here:
Ryder, Big Walnut reach 'tentative resolution' - Delaware Gazette

Good morning.

Russia has increased the intensity of its eastern offensive but has been repeatedly repelled by Ukrainian forces, the UKs Ministry of Defence (MoD) has said, as western governments pledged to send more artillery, and a new deadline for surrender in Mariupol approached.

The MoD said late on Tuesday that shelling and strikes were increasing over the line of control in Donbas but that Russian forces continued to be hampered by logistical and technological problems. It also noted an inability to stamp out resistance in Mariupol as a sign of failure to achieve Moscows objectives.

The Russian defence ministry has said it will offer the besieged port city a ceasefire today to allow Ukrainian defenders holed up in the Azovstal steelworks to lay down their arms. About 1,000 civilians are reportedly hiding in underground shelters beneath the steel plant in Mariupol, according to the city council. Most of the civilians are believed to be women with children and elderly people.

How are Ukrainian troops faring in Mariupol? A commander for the Ukrainian marines in Mariupol said his forces were maybe facing our last days, if not hours and appealed for extraction, in a Facebook post published early this morning.

What is happening with the diplomatic effort? Western nations are preparing to stage coordinated walkouts and other diplomatic snubs in protest at Russias invasion of Ukraine at a meeting of G20 finance ministers in Washington. Janet Yellen, the US treasury secretary, is planning to avoid sessions attended by Russian officials.

What else is happening? Heres what we know on day 56 of the invasion.

Donald Trump attempted a coup on 6 January 2021 as he tried to salvage his doomed presidency, and that will be a central focus of forthcoming public hearings of the special House panel investigating events surrounding the insurrection at the US Capitol, the congressman Jamie Raskin has said.

Raskin is a prominent Democrat on the committee and also led the House efforts when Trump was impeached for a historic second time, in 2021, accused of inciting the storming of the US Capitol by his extremist supporters who were trying to stop the certification of Joe Bidens victory.

This was a coup organized by the president against the vice-president and against the Congress in order to overturn the 2020 presidential election, Raskin said in an interview with the Guardian, Reuters news agency and the Climate One radio program.

Public hearings by the bipartisan special committee investigating January 6 and related actions by Trump and his White House team and other allies, chaired by the Mississippi Democrat Bennie Thompson, are expected next month.

Reproductive rights advocates in Texas have filed a new legal challenge to halt a near total abortion ban that has been in effect for more than half a year.

Senate bill 8 bars abortion once embryonic cardiac activity is detected typically as early as six week of pregnancy, which is before most people are aware they are pregnant and offers no exception for rape or incest. The lawsuit, filed yesterday, asks a federal court to rule the extreme law unconstitutional. It cites public threats and legal action from anti-abortion activists against Texas abortion funds, groups that have been instrumental in helping patients travel out of state for care, arguing that this conduct has chilled their first amendment rights.

Plaintiffs urgently need this court to stop Texass brazen defiance of the rule of law, uphold the federal constitutional rights of pregnant Texans, and restore the ability of abortion funds and their donors, employees and volunteers to fully serve Texas abortion patients, the federal court filing reads.

Wendy Davis, a former Texas senator who famously led an 11-hour filibuster against an anti-abortion bill in 2013, said: We are asking the courts today to stop the unconstitutional harassment of abortion funds by confirming SB 8 cannot be used to silence donors with bogus threats.

Prince Harry has said the Queen was on great form during their recent meeting, and he wanted to make sure she had the right people around her. Speaking to NBC about his meeting with the monarch, Harry said: Being with her it was great, it was just so nice to see her, shes on great form.

In a 59-page opinion on Monday, the US district judge Kathryn Mizelle of Tampa, Florida, overturned the federal requirement that people wear masks on planes and public transportation. She has become an instant heroine of the Republican right hailed for courage and common sense.

The Fantastic Beasts star Ezra Miller has been arrested on suspicion of assault in Hawaii. Miller already faces charges of harassment and disorderly conduct after an incident last month at a karaoke bar on the island.

A growing number of cities and states have restricted the information that local law enforcement departments can exchange with immigration authorities. But new documents reveal that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) has tapped private technology companies to skirt such sanctuary policies.

Netflix lost subscribers for the first time in 10 years at the start of the year and said it expects to lose even more in the spring, sending its share price crashing again yesterday. The streaming giants share price initially fell close to 20% on news that it had lost 200,000 subscribers globally during the first quarter.

Some of the largest, most profitable companies in retail and food services are still paying most of their workers less than $15 an hour, and many staff still make less than $10 an hour, according to a company wage tracker developed by the Economic Policy Institute and the Shift Project. According to a 2021 report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition, a worker needs to make at least $20.40 an hour to afford the rent of the average one-bedroom apartment in the US.

Ashley Stayner is a self-professed true crime fan. She also happens to have had a front-row seat to two true crime narratives in her own family, writes Radheyan Simonpillai. Her father is the abduction victim turned hero Steven Stayner, the subject of the two-part television movie I Know My First Name is Steven, which aired in 1989. Her uncle is Carey Stayner, the serial killer sitting on death row for the Yosemite murders, which have been covered on numerous true crime programs such as American Justice, FBI: Criminal Pursuit and more.

The Biden administration is launching a $6bn effort to rescue nuclear power plants at risk of closing, citing the need to retain nuclear energy as a carbon-free source of power that helps to combat climate change. US nuclear power plants contribute more than half of our carbon-free electricity, and President Biden is committed to keeping these plants active to reach our clean energy goals, said the energy secretary, Jennifer Granholm. Were using every tool available to get this country powered by clean energy by 2035.

An aggressive humpback whale appeared to turn the tables on a pod of orcas off the Canadian coast, stalking and then ambushing the group that more usually would have been attacking it. The rare occurrence took place in the Salish Sea between British Columbia and Washington state and was witnessed by tourists on a whale-watching trip. Theres something happening in front of us that hasnt been seen before, Olivia Esqueda told CHEK News. Its hard not to just kind of be like a kid at Disney World.

Sign up for the US morning briefing

First Thing is delivered to thousands of inboxes every weekday. If youre not already signed up, subscribe now.

If you have any questions or comments about any of our newsletters please email newsletters@theguardian.com

Excerpt from:
First Thing: Ukraine repelling intense Russian offensive in east - The Guardian

Censorship doesnt always look like a black line across a document, or a clear order to remove a piece of content. Websites feel pressured without the government having to issue a clear directive that they host certain speakers or carry certain content. The First Amendment recognizes that speech can often be chilled in other waysfor example, by a burdensome governmental investigation. In an amicus brief filed yesterday, EFF, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and R Street, urged the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to take the case en banc and protect Twitter from a retaliatory investigation by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

On January 8, 2020, two days after the January 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol, Twitter banned then-President Trump from the platform, citing a risk of further incitement of violence. Five days later, Attorney General Paxton issued a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) to Twitter (and other major online platforms) for, among other things, any documents relating to its terms of use and content moderation practices. Paxton explicitly connected his investigation to Twitters decision. The CID alleged "possible violations" of Texas's deceptive practices law.

The demand subjected Twitters internal discussion about content moderation rules or decisions to discovery under the CID and second-guessing by AG Paxton. This put Twitter in a difficult position and pressured it to minimize its legal, reputational, and financial risks by self-censoring along the lines indicated by AG Paxton. Twitter sued Paxton, claiming that he was abusing his authority as the highest law-enforcement officer of the State of Texas to intimidate, harass, and target Twitter in retaliation for Twitters exercise of its First Amendment rights.

Last week, a panel of judges on the Ninth Circuit wrongly ruled that Twitter cannot sue Paxton until a possible enforcement action at the conclusion of Paxtons investigation, or until the CID is enforced.. But as our brief to the Ninth Circuit says, even pre-enforcement, threatened punishment of speech has a chilling effect. Since the previous panel got this wrong, a more comprehensive en banc hearing is needed. From the moment it was issued, the CID chilled Twitter from exercising its First Amendment-protected right to engage in content moderation. Requiring the company to endure even more retaliation by Paxton before it can sue harms Twitters First Amendment rights.

From the brief:

An investigation and CID from a state attorney general for documents about a hosts content moderation practicesparticularly when coupled with the attorney generals critical public statements about the hosts content moderation decisionssend a strong message of disapproval and threat of legal consequences for the host if it continues its disfavored content moderation actions. Hosts targeted by a CID as part of a state attorney generals retaliatory investigation will fear harsh legal consequences if they continue content moderation practices like those that sparked the investigation. In the face of such retaliation, a host may believe that the state attorney general will treat it more leniently or drop an investigation entirely if it ceases the content moderation practices with which the attorney general disagrees.

Paxtons investigation is part of a trend of government officials in the United States using investigations to pressure or punish hosts for making content moderation decisions with which they disagree. This is bad for everyone: access to online platforms with different rules and environments generally benefits users. The Ninth Circuits decision risks encouraging this unconstitutional trend of government officials investigating hosts for content moderation decisions with which they disagree. There are certainly content moderation issues on online platforms, which have rightfully been criticized for removing benign posts, censoring human rights activists and journalists, and other bad content moderation practicesas we noted in our brief. But a chilling government investigation is not the right way to resolve those issues.

Original post:
EFF and Partners to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals: Retaliatory Investigation of Twitter Chills First Amendment Rights - EFF

Free speech is vital for progress. It makes fighting for change possible by protecting and exposing new ideas and perspectives, which leads us to innovate, learn and solve problems together. Because the First Amendment is crucial to our freedom, its imperative that Americans especially public officials remain on high alert to protect it.

Thats increasingly a monumental task. From misguided anti-protest bills to censoring books and divisive concepts, some lawmakers, either knowingly or unknowingly, look for ways to silence other Americans and ideas they dont like. While these speech issues are seemingly in the news every day, one little-known and under-discussed method to silence other Americans takes place through our legal system: strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPPs. These are meritless lawsuits intended to intimidate and silence journalists, whistleblowers and everyday Americans.

People who file SLAPPs know they are unlikely to result in victory in court. The lawsuit itself is the goal. Getting sued is expensive, time-consuming, embarrassing and stressful, even when the suit is without merit. And most people lack the knowledge, resources and time to properly defend themselves, so often being sued or just getting threatened with being sued is enough to cause people to back down and keep their mouths shut.

Fortunately, there is a policy solution to this problem. State and federal anti-SLAPP efforts enable people to voice their opinions. Our organization, Americans for Prosperity, works with a diverse array of partners to reform policies to make it easier for courts to quickly identify and dismiss SLAPPs. Most recently, AFPs efforts to protect free speech paid off in Tennessee and Texas, where the legislatures passed anti-SLAPP measures. This year, five more states are considering similar policies.

According to a new report by the Institute for Free Speech, 31 states and the District of Columbia now have functioning anti-SLAPP statutes. The IFS report assesses the existing anti-SLAPP statutes and provides ratings from A to F for their effectiveness in protecting First Amendment rights. Of the 32 jurisdictions with functioning anti-SLAPP statutes, 17 received a grade of B or higher; the remaining 15 jurisdictions received a C-plus or lower.

The last thing America needs is to have our already overburdened legal system clogged with pointless, frivolous lawsuits. But the more important issue is protecting the rights of Americans to exercise their constitutional right to speak freely. As public officials, lawmakers have the opportunity to protect these rights and to make sure that free speech remains the best tool Americans have to drive progress.

David Voorman is the senior policy analyst for free speech and peace at Americans for Prosperity. For a primer on SLAPPs, see this AFP post.

Read the original here:
How the Courts Are Being Used to Intimidate Americans into Silence - Governing

A measure passed off the Senate Floor Mondayto create a Free Speech Committee that will oversee Oklahomas public universities and colleges.

House author Representative Chad Caldwell (R-Enid) says he wants HB 3543 to ensure protection of all speech.

To protect the rights and the free speech rights for all of our faculty and staff. Its not punitive, its not trying to be one-sided or the other. Free speech should be a non-partisan or bipartisan issue.

Representative Caldwell says his concern about the issue comes in part from the national research group TheFire.org.

Anecdotally, Ive heard about different grades that have been given, certainly there have been some instances where there have been some professors that have maybe espoused a different viewpoint that have been suspended or even terminated, he said.

The Oklahoma State Board of Regents will oversee the Free Speech Committee.

The committee is directed to create a first amendment training for school leadership and develop a process of collecting complaints.

On the Senate Floor, lawmakers questioned how the committee would be established.

The bill does not speak to whether it's the regents directly or its the administration of the state regents who will select the committee members, said Senate author Julie Daniels (R-Bartlesville).

The measure passed 43-to-2 and is now eligible to be signed by the governor.

The State Board of Regents responded to the passage in a statement this afternoon, saying:

Were aware that HB 3543 passed on the Senate floor today. As public colleges and universities, our state system institutions embrace the First Amendment and recognize the importance of free speech, which is reflected in myriad viewpoints shared through academic discourse on campuses across the state. If this measure becomes law, we will follow the provisions to create a process that ensures our institutions continue to be places where the open exchange of ideas and perspectives is encouraged and protected.

Communications staff with the state board say they are unaware of a committee of this type being created in the past.

See more here:
Bill To Create Statewide 'Free Speech Committee' Overseeing Universities Headed To Governor's Desk - news9.com KWTV