Episódios
-
Ep. 214: ‘Private Censorship’ with J.P. Messina
The First Amendment forbids government censorship. Private institutions, on the other hand, are generally free to restrict speech.
How should we think about private censorship and its role within a liberal society?
On today’s episode, we’re joined by J.P. Messina, an assistant professor in the philosophy department at Purdue University and the author of the new book, “Private Censorship.”
Also on the show is Aaron Terr, FIRE’s director of public advocacy.
Show transcript:
https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-private-censorship-jp-messinaTimestamps
0:00 Introduction
3:10 The origin story of “Private Censorship”
8:29 How does FIRE figure out what to weigh in on?
12:04 Examples of private censorship
18:24 Regulating speech at work
22:21 Regulating speech on social media platforms
30:09 Is social media essentially a public utility?
35:50 Are internet service providers essentially public utilities?
44:43 Social media vs. ISPs
51:02 Censorship on search engines
59:47 Defining illiberalism outside of government censorship
1:16:06 Outro
Show Notes
Packingham v. North Carolina (2017)
Cloudflare’s announcement regarding the Daily Stormer
-
On May 1, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Antisemitism Awareness Act by a vote of 320 to 91. Proponents of the law say it is necessary to address anti-Semitic discrimination on college campuses. Opponents argue it threatens free speech.
Who’s right?
Kenneth Stern was the lead drafter of the definition of anti-Semitism used in the act. But he said the definition was never meant to punish speech. Rather, it was drafted to help data collectors write reports.
Stern is the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate. His most recent book is titled, “The Conflict Over the Conflict: The Israel/Palestine Campus Debate.”
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
04:06 Introducing Ken Stern
7:59 Can hate speech codes work?
11:13 Off-campus hate speech codes
13:33 Drafting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition
21:53 How should administrators judge anti-Semitism without the IHRA definition?
27:29 Is there a rise in unlawful discrimination on campuses today?
40:20 Opposition to the Antisemitism Awareness Act
43:10 Defenses of the Antisemitism Awareness Act
51:34 Enshrinement of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism in state laws
53:57 Is the IHRA definition internally consistent?
59:21 How will the Senate vote?
1:01:16 Outro
Show Notes
IHRA definition of anti-Semitism
The Antisemitism Awareness Act
Transcript
-
Estão a faltar episódios?
-
Host Nico Perrino joins his FIRE colleagues Will Creeley and Alex Morey to answer questions about the recent campus unrest and its First Amendment implications.
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
0:41 What is FIRE?/campus unrest
5:44 What are the basic First Amendment principles for campus protest?
11:30 Student encampments
18:09 Exceptions to the First Amendment
29:01 Can administrators limit access to non-students/faculty?
34:13 Denying recognition to Students for Justice in Palestine
36:26 Were protesters at UT Austin doing anything illegal?
40:54 The USC valedictorian
45:09 What does “objectively offensive” mean? / Does Davis apply to colleges?
46:55 Is it illegal to protest too loudly?
50:03 What options do colleges have to moderate/address hate speech?
54:20 Does calling for genocide constitute bullying/harassment?
59:09 Wrapping up on the situation
Show Notes
“USC canceling valedictorian’s commencement speech looks like calculated censorship,” Alex Morey
“Emerson College: Conservative Student Group Investigated for Distributing ‘China Kinda Sus’ Stickers,” FIRE’s case files
“HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship,” Nadine Strossen
“Defending My Enemy: American Nazis, the Skokie Case, and the Risks of Freedom,” Aryeh Neier (pdf)
“David Goldberger, lead attorney in ‘the Skokie case,’” “So to Speak” Ep. 118
Transcript
-
In America, hate speech is generally protected by the First Amendment.
But should it be?
Today’s guest is out with a new book, “Hate Speech is Not Free: The Case Against First Amendment Protection.”
W. Wat Hopkins is emeritus professor of communication at Virginia Tech, where he taught communication law and cyberspace law.
Transcript of Interview: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-should-first-amendment-protect-hate-speech
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
5:34 Why write about hate speech?
8:50 Has the Supreme Court ruled on hate speech?
13:56 What speech falls outside First Amendment protection?
16:44 The history of the First Amendment
20:00 Fighting words and Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)
24:00 How does the Supreme Court determine what speech is protected?
35:24 Defining hate speech
38:54 Debating the value of hate speech
44:02 Defining hate speech (again)
50:30 Abuses of hate speech codes
1:00:10 Skokie
1:02:39 Current Supreme Court and hate speech
1:06:00 OutroShow Notes
Scotland’s “Hate Crime and Public Order Act”
Matal v. Tam (2017)
Snyder v. Phelps (2011)
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (2011)
United States v. Stevens (2010)
Virginia v. Black (2003)
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992)
National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977)
Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley (1972)
Beauharnais v. Illinois (1952)
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)
“HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship” by Nadine Strossen -
In late 2013, some of us at FIRE started noticing a change on college campuses. Students, who were previously the strongest constituency for free speech on campus, were turning against free speech. They began appealing to administrators more frequently for protection from different speakers and using the language of trauma and safety to justify censorship.
What changed?
Neil Howe may have an answer. He is a historian, economist, and demographer who speaks frequently on generational change. His most recent book, “The Fourth Turning is Here,” was published last year. Howe argues that history has seasonal rhythms of growth, maturation, entropy, and rebirth and that different generations take on different attributes reflecting their place in the cycle.Joining Howe and host Nico Perrino for the conversation is FIRE President and CEO Greg Lukianoff, co-author of “The Canceling of the American Mind."
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
6:10 Neil’s intent with his book, “Generations”
13:12 Pattern in American history
17:08 The nomad archetype
25:00 Covid and the younger generation
27:28 Do people shape events?
35:35 Gen-Xers and Millennials
41:45 The Fourth Turning
50:24 William James’ “The Moral Equivalent of War”
57:08 Are Gen-Z actually Millennials?
58:10 Dominant generations
01:06:40 How do generational cycles impact civil liberties?
01:10:57 Summary of Millennials
01:18:15 Peaceful periods lead to greater inequality
1:19:16 Outro
Show Notes
Neil Howe’s Substack, “Demography Unplugged”
Greg Lukianoff’s Substack, “The Eternally Radical Idea”
-
“I have never seen a Supreme Court term that is as consequential as this one is going to be,” said FIRE Chief Counsel Bob Corn-Revere, previewing this term’s First Amendment cases.
On today’s show, we analyze the oral arguments in four of those cases: NRA v. Vullo, Murthy v. Missouri (formerly Missouri v. Biden), Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, and NetChoice, LLC, v. Paxton.
We also discuss the court’s decision in two cases involving government officials blocking their critics on social media.
Joining the show are Corn-Revere, FIRE General Counsel Ronnie London, and FIRE Director of Public Advocacy Aaron Terr.
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
3:29 NRA v. Vullo
26:05 Murthy v. Missouri
50:41 Netchoice cases
1:11:26 Lindke v. Freed and O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier
1:21:24 Outro
Show Notes
NRA v. Vullo oral argument transcript
Bantam Books, Inc. et. al v Sullivan et al. (1963)
Murthy v. Missouri oral argument transcript
Moody v. NetChoice, LLC oral argument transcript
NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton oral argument transcript
Lindke v. Freed and O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier decisions
‘So to Speak’ on Substack
Transcript
-
There is a recurring debate in the free speech community regarding whether money is speech.
Bitcoin-focused entrepreneur, writer, and philosopher Robert Breedlove joins us today to help resolve the debate. Describing money as “the language of human action,” Robert makes the case that money, like the cryptocurrency Bitcoin, is information and should be free from government regulation and manipulation. During this longer-than-usual episode, Robert and Nico discuss everything from Keynesian economics and 3D-printed firearms to the Chinese Communist Party.
Robert is the host of the popular podcast, “The ‘What is Money?’ Show,” which dives into the nature of money by asking guests one simple question: What is money? In 2020, he co-authored the book, “Thank God for Bitcoin: The Creation, Corruption and Redemption of Money.”
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
3:56 Robert’s background
19:21 What is Austrian economics?
24:23 Is money speech?
44:48 Can money express irrational things?
51:59 Is access to perfect information always a good thing?
1:05:17 Bitcoin and anonymity
1:18:14 Prediction markets
1:31:49 Is code speech?
1:39:59 Is economic freedom more fundamental than freedom of speech?
1:49:13 Regulating bitcoin
1:55:16 Bitcoin ETFs
1:57:03 Rapid-fire Bitcoin questions
2:03:15 Does more access to information make the world a better place?
2:06:53 Outro
Show Notes
“The ‘What is Money?’ Show”
“The Creature from Jekyll Island” by G Edward Griffin
“The Bitcoin Standard” by Saifedean Ammous
“The Use of Knowledge in Society” by Friedrich Hayek
“The Logic of Scientific Discovery” by Karl Popper
“Areopagitica” by John Milton
Transcript
-
On today’s episode, we discuss Alexei Navalny’s death, Vladimir Putin, censorship in Russia, and Samizdat Online, an anti-censorship platform that grants users living under authoritarian regimes access to news and other censored content. Yevgeny “Genia” Simkin is the co-founder of Samizdat Online and Stanislav “Stas” Kucher is its chief content officer.
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
2:25 Alexei Navalny
8:53 The state of Russian opposition
20:48 The origins of Samizdat Online
28:17 How does Samizdat Online circumvent censorship?
35:16 Could Yevgeny Prigozhin have overthrown Putin?
41:03 The progression of Putin’s regime
58:08 How can people help?
59:56 Outro
Show notes
Statement by Russian prison service on Alexei Navalny’s death
The Anti-Corruption Foundation (nonprofit established by Alexei Navalny)
Samizdat Online
“Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible” by Peter Pomerantsev
Transcript
Past related episodes
Ep. 108: A history of (dis)information wars in the Soviet Union and beyond
Ep. 156: What Russians don’t know about the war in Ukraine
Ep. 157: Former BBC bureau chief Konstantin Eggert and what you need to know about censorship in Russia
-
On today’s free speech news roundup, we discuss the recent NetChoice oral argument, Taylor Swift, doxxing, October 7 fallout on campus, and Satan in Iowa.
Joining us on the show are Alex Morey, FIRE director of Campus Rights Advocacy; Aaron Terr, director of Public Advocacy; and Ronnie London, our general counsel.
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
0:44 NetChoice oral arguments
19:39 Taylor Swift cease and desist letter
29:20 Publishing unlawfully obtained information
39:28 Harvard and doxxing
47:44 Princeton no contact orders
55:52 Columbia law denies recognition to Law Students Against Antisemitism
1:02:38 Columbia adopts Kalven Report
1:06:06 Indiana University art exhibit canceled, professor suspended
1:14:55 Satan in Iowa
1:21:59 Outro
Show Notes
“So to Speak” 2023-24 Supreme Court Preview (contains discussion of NetChoice cases)
Correspondence between Taylor Swift and Jack Sweeney’s attorneys
Bartnicki v. Vopper (2001)
Princeton no contact order
Columbia university grants recognition to Law Students Against Antisemitism
IHRA definition of anti-Semitism
List of universities that have adopted the Kalven Report
Indiana University art exhibit story
Indiana University professor suspended for improper reservation
Iowa Satanism bill
Shurtleff v. Boston (2022)
“So to Speak”: Substack
Transcript
-
J Hopkins is an American playwright, novelist, and political satirist. He moved to Germany in 2004. He publishes a self-titled blog on Substack and is the editor of Consent Factory Publishing.
CJ’s most recent book, “The Rise of the New Normal Reich,” draws a parallel between Nazi Germany and the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In August 2022, it was banned on Amazon in Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands. In the months that followed, CJ was charged by German authorities with violating a section of the German penal code that prohibits “disseminating information, the intention of which is to further the aims of a former National-Socialist organization [the Nazis].” He was recently acquitted, but the prosecutor chose to appeal the decision.
In the coming months, CJ will stand trial — again — for a crime he claims he didn’t commit and for which he has already been acquitted.
**We are launching on Substack this week! Nothing will change for our listeners. It’s just another way to support the podcast and FIRE. Premium subscribers will receive a FIRE membership and access to our new monthly “Members Only” Zoom chats, where we will discuss free speech news and happenings at FIRE. Members will also be able to ask Nico and other FIRE staffers questions.**
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
2:58 Who is CJ Hopkins?
9:35 CJ moves to Germany
15:02 CJ’s work since 2004
18:23 Berlin in 2020
27:18 “The Rise of the New Normal Reich”
34:01 CJ’s book banned in Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands
37:05 German investigation
47:26 German sensitivities to Nazism
50:17 Why didn’t CJ just pay the fine?
54:03 CJ goes to trial
1:03:29 Double-jeopardy / prosecutorial appeal
1:08:49 Does CJ have regrets?
1:12:50 Conclusion
Show Notes
Atlantic profile by Jamie Kirchick
“Berlin Diary” by William L. Shirer
“The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” by William L. Shirer
“The Rise of the New Normal Reich” by CJ Hopkins
Consent Factory
“The Verdict” by CJ Hopkins, a Substack article about the conclusion of his first trial
“The Rise of the New Normal Reich: Consent Factory Essays, Vol. III, banned in Germany, Austria, and The Netherlands!” by CJ Hopkins, a Substack article about his book being banned on Amazon
Transcript
-
Michael Malice is a self-described “anarchist without adjectives” and is the author of several books, including most recently “The White Pill: A Tale of Good and Evil.” He is also the host of the podcast, “YOUR WELCOME,” and the subject of the biographical comic book, “Ego & Hubris: The Michael Malice Story.”
Michael joins us today to explain why he hates the term “free speech,” and gives his thoughts on McCarthyism, anarchism, Twitter, and more.
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
0:46 Who is Michael Malice?
6:45 What is an anarchist without adjectives?
7:26 The definition of anarchism/prominent anarchists
8:01 How do we have free speech in an anarchist society?
16:54 The McCarthy Era
20:38 Students for Justice in Palestine
24:57 Should we advocate for a culture of free speech?
30:44 “Hitman”
34:01 What is the core right under an anarchist system?
36:26 Elon, Twitter, and free speech
44:38 Emma Goldman and McCarthyism
55:27 Cancel culture
1:01:37 From Emma Goldman to Solzhenitsyn
1:05:31 What is it like to live under an authoritarian regime?
1:12:23 The war in Ukraine
1:15:24 Outro
Show Notes
“Dear Reader: The Unauthorized Autobiography of Kim Jong Il” by Michael Malice
“Hitman: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors” by Rex Feral (pseud.)
“Khrushchev's Secret Speech” (Encyclopedia Britannica entry)
“My Disillusionment in Russia” by Emma Goldman
“Schenck v United States” (1919)
“The Anarchist Handbook” by Michael Malice
“The Gulag Archipelago” by Alexandr Solzhenitsyn
“The New Right: A Journey to the Fringe of American Politics” by Michael Malice
Episode Transcript
-
Jeff Kosseff is an associate professor of cybersecurity law in the United States Naval Academy’s Cyber Science Department. He is the author of four books including his most recent, “Liar in a Crowded Theater: Freedom of Speech in a World of Misinformation.” He has also written books about anonymous speech and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
2:30 Jeff’s focus on the First Amendment
4:27 What is Section 230?
9:30 “Liar in a Crowded Theater”
16:27 What does the First Amendment say about lies?
19:35 What speech isn’t protected?
21:27 The Eminem case
27:33 The Dominion lawsuit
38:44 “The United States of Anonymous”
46:39 The impact of age verification laws
49:43 “The Twenty-Six Words that Created the Internet”
58:40 What’s next for Jeff?
1:01:35 Outro
Show Notes
Podcast Transcript
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (2011)
FIRE’s guide to Section 230
Nikki Haley on social media anonymity
Schenck v. United States (1917)
“The Twenty-Six Words That Created the Internet” by Jeff Kosseff
NBC News: “Judge allows lawsuit against Snap from relatives of dead children to move forward”
“The United States of Anonymous: How the First Amendment Shaped Online Speech” by Jeff Kosseff
United States v. Alvarez (2012)
Transcript
-
Bill Courtney is an American football coach, entrepreneur, author, and the subject of the academy award winning 2011 documentary “Undefeated,” which tells the story of Courtney leading a high school football team in an economically depressed area of Memphis, Tenn. to the playoffs.
Courtney is the host of the An Army of Normal Folks podcast, in which he shares stories of “ordinary people doing extraordinary things in and around their communities.” His book “Against the Grain: A Coach's Wisdom on Character, Faith, Family, and Love” was released in 2014.
In this episode, we discuss coaching, the surprise success of “Undefeated,” and how talking across lines of difference can heal a polarized America.Chapters:
0:00 Introduction
2:25 Courtney’s background
5:41 The influence of coaches
16:50 How Courtney ended up at Manassas High School
18:50 Coaching in difficult environments
24:30 Bridging divides
30:12 Forgiveness and grace
35:57 Daryl Davis
42:45 The “death spiral” of division and polarization
53:15 What happened to Manassas after Courtney left?
54:00 How did the filmmakers find Manassas?
59:21 Was the documentary good for the school and the kids?
Show Transcript
-
We’re joined today by Elizabeth Nolan Brown, Robert Corn-Revere, and Ronnie London to discuss the history and verdict of the Backpage trial.
Backpage.com was an online classified advertising service founded in 2004. As a chief competitor to Craigslist, Backpage allowed users to post ads to categories such as personals, automotive, rentals, jobs and — most notably — adult services. In 2018, the website domain was seized by the FBI and its executives were prosecuted under federal prostitution and money laundering statutes. The trial concluded this year, resulting in the acquittal and convictions of several key executives.
Some First Amendment advocates are concerned that the Backpage case represents a “slippery slope” for the prosecution of protected speech and the rights of websites that host user-generated content.
Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason Magazine, where she has written about the Backpage case in detail.
Robert Corn-Revere is FIRE’s chief counsel and a frequent guest of the show. Prior to joining FIRE, he represented Backpage in private practice.
Ronnie London is FIRE’s general counsel and another frequent guest of the show. He also represented Backpage when he was in private practice prior to joining FIRE.
Timestamps
00:00 Introduction
06:55 The origins of Backpage
10:40 The significance of classified ads
14:52 Are escort ads protected?
19:07 Federal memos indicating Backpage fought child sex trafficking
23:19 Backpage content moderation
34:44 Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
42:59 “De-banking” and NRA v. Vullo
52:24 The verdict
1:00:34 Could these convictions be overturned?
1:02:49 Outro
Show notes
Backpage.com url
2018 Backpage indictment
Elizabeth Nolan Brown’s 2018 Backpage profile
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
NRA v. Vullo
The Travel Act
-
Nico and FIRE President & CEO Greg Lukianoff appeared on an X Space to discuss the fallout from the recent congressional hearing on anti-Semitism involving Harvard President Claudine Gay, MIT President Sally Kornbluth, and former Penn President Liz Magill, who resigned last week following backlash over her testimony.
Timestamps
0:00- Introduction
1:53 - History of FIRE
5:40 - MIT/Harvard/Penn presidents’ testimony
11:35 - How speech codes are abused and conflict over the definition of genocide
14:05 - Penn “water buffalo” incident
16:20 - Will universities take the wrong lesson from these hearings?
21:25 - Double standards on campus
23:41 - Standards for hostile environment harassment, Title VI
26:43 - Is there a university that is currently handling the situation well?
31:19 - Institutional neutrality
38:29 - Guidance for donors
41:51 - The mission of the university
47:35 - College admissions and political litmus tests
51:20 - Faculty viewpoint diversity
57:17 - The path forward
Show notes
Show Transcript
The Canceling of the American Mind
Congressional hearing
FIRE’s College Free Speech Rankings
Kalven Report
“Mighty Ira”
Richard Berthold (“anyone who can blow up the pentagon has my vote”)
Student arrested for true threats at Cornell
Skokie case (neo Nazi protest in Illinois)
The Eternally Radical Idea (Greg’s Substack)
Penn “water buffalo” case
-
We’re joined by First Amendment attorney Marc Randazza and British journalist Brendan O’Neill to discuss the state of free speech in the United States and Europe.
Randazza is a First Amendment attorney and the managing partner at Randazza Legal Group. He has represented controversial figures throughout his career, including Alex Jones, Mike Cernovich, Chuck Johnson, and founder of the neo-nazi website the Daily Stormer, Andrew Anglin.
O’Neill is a British author and journalist who served as editor of Spiked from 2007 to September 2021 and is currently its chief political writer. His book, “Heretic’s Manifesto,” was released in June. He last appeared on the podcast on October 20, 2016.
Timestamps
0:00 Introduction
6:35 Do lawyers want to defend their enemies any more?
13:00 The oldest form of intolerance
17:19 Israel/Hamas and double standards
32:28 Hate speech laws in Ireland
51:35 Censorship from internet intermediaries
52:33 Debanking and corporate censorship
55:36 PruneYard case
1:01:44 Social media and the internet
1:05:18 The Digital Services Act
Show Notes
Show Transcript
Brendan O’Neill at Oxford Union
EU Digital Services Act
Proposed Irish hate speech bill
PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins (1980)
-
The FIRE team gets together to discuss the October 7 attacks in Israel and the resulting censorship on college campuses in the United States.
FIRE President and CEO Greg Lukianoff, Director of Campus Rights Advocacy Alex Morey, and General Counsel Ronnie London join host Nico Perrino for the conversation.
** We will conduct a listener survey starting Monday, Nov. 13. “So to Speak” listeners who subscribe to the show’s email list will receive an email with a link to the survey. If you are not an email subscriber, you can subscribe at the bottom of sotospeakpodcast.com or by subscribing to the general FIRE email list at thefire.org and noting that you would also like to subscribe to the “So to Speak” list. We appreciate your feedback: It will help us improve the show!
Timestamps
5:13 - October 7 attacks on Israel
6:04 - Greg’s initial thoughts
14:58 - Alex’s initial thoughts
20:29 - Protected vs. unprotected expression
28:11 - Statements from donors, students and faculty; double standards
40:49 - Institutional neutrality and the Kalven Report
51:01 - Combating Anti-Semitism, the Daryl Davis example
54:46 - Students for Justice in Palestine
1:01:48 - Tearing down posters
Show Notes
TranscriptHarvard student group letter (The public-facing Google Doc that originally hosted the letter was deleted.)
Bill Ackman letter to Harvard
The Kalven Report
Daryl Davis
FIRE Letter to University of Florida President Ben Sasse re: Students for Justice in Palestine (after recording this episode, Brandeis University derecognized its campus chapter of SJP. Here is FIRE’s letter to Brandeis).
Ron DeSantis, Tim Scott, and Marco Rubio call to revoke student visas
Trump Truth Social post calls for the expulsion of students who support Hamas
-
The Supreme Court handed down some big First Amendment victories last term. What lies ahead for the Court in the upcoming term? FIRE Chief Counsel Robert Corn-Revere and FIRE General Counsel Ronnie London join the show to discuss important First Amendment cases that will be heard during the Court’s 2023-24 session.
Timestamps:
0:00 - Introduction
1:47 - Murthy v. Missouri (government jawboning)
14:40 - NRA v. Vullo (government jawboning)
25:49 - NetChoice cases (social media regulation)
46:39 - Social media blocking cases
56:15 - Vidal v. Elster (trademark registration)
1:05:17 - Gonzalez v. Trevino (First Amendment retaliation)
Show Transcript:
https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-2023-24-supreme-court-preview
Cases Discussed:
Murthy v. Missouri (government jawboning)
NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton (social media regulation)
Moody v. NetChoice, LLC (social media regulation)
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier (social media blocking)
Lindke v. Freed (social media blocking)
Vidal v. Elster (trademark registration)
Gonzalez v. Trevino (First Amendment retaliation)
Nat’l. Rifle Ass’n. of Am. v. Vullo (government jawboning)
-
President, CEO, and general counsel of the Alliance Defending Freedom, Kristen Waggoner, joins us for a discussion on freedom of speech and religious liberty. ADF has played various roles in 74 U.S. Supreme Court victories and since 2011, has won cases before the Court 15 times.
According to its website, “ADF is the world's largest legal organization committed to protecting religious freedom, free speech, marriage and family, parental rights, and the sanctity of life.”
ADF has litigated many high profile and controversial free speech cases, including the recent Supreme Court case involving a web designer who didn’t want to be compelled to design websites for same-sex weddings. Before that, ADF litigated the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop case, which involved a cake designer who similarly didn’t want to provide his services for same-sex weddings on religious grounds.
After the initial conversation was recorded, The Washington Post and The New Yorker released articles critical of ADF. Nico and Kristen recorded an additional, brief conversation to address these articles. That is included at the end of the podcast.
Transcript:
https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-are-cakes-speech-alliance-defending-freedoms-kristen
Timestamps:
0:43 - Introduction
6:16 - Kristen’s path to ADF
12:54 - ADF’s international team
14:20 - Pavi Rasanen controversy
19:24 - What does it mean to be a ministry?/blasphemy laws
22:56 - ADF’s Supreme Court cases
26:58 - 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis
28:56 - Public accommodation laws/Masterpiece Cakeshop
40:40 - Pre-enforcement challenges
42:50 - Facial challenges
47:32 - Test cases or fake cases?
49:44 - Yale incident
57:50 - Other campus shoutdowns
1:00:08 - L.M. v. Town of Middleborough
1:14:27 - Kristen addresses WaPo article
1:15:38 - Kristen addresses New Yorker article
Related Articles/Podcasts:
“Inside the tactics that won Christian vendors the right to reject gay weddings,” Jon Swaine and Beth Reinhard (The Washington Post)
“Are ADF’s Cases ‘Made Up’?” Lathan Watts (ADF, response to The Washington Post)
“The next targets for the group that overturned Roe,” David D. Kirkpatrick (The New Yorker)
FIRE’s response to Kristen Waggoner Yale incident
FIRE’s response to Anne Coulter Cornell incident
FIRE’s response to Ilya Shapiro Georgetown incident
FIRE’s response to Ian Haworth UAlbany incident
“The Imperfect Plaintiffs” (“More Perfect” podcast with Julia Longoria)
Cases Discussed:
Dubash v. City of Houston (Animal rights activists lawsuit, 2023)
Paivi Rasanen (Finnish lawmaker charged with incitement against gay people)
303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2022)
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2017)
Uzuebgunam v. Preczewski (2021)
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)
Wooley v. Maynard (1997)
Plessy v. Ferguson (1986)
L.M. v. Town of Middleborough (2023)
www.sotospeakpodcast.com
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@freespeechtalk
Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freespeechtalk/
Email us: [email protected]
-
Writer and academic Yascha Mounk argues that a new set of ideas about race, gender, and sexual orientation have overtaken society, giving rise to a rigid focus on identity in our national debate. In his new book, “The Identity Trap: A Story of Ideas and Power in Our Time,” Yascha seeks to take these ideas seriously, understand their origin, dissect their merits and failings, and offer a path forward to avoid what he calls “the identity trap.”
On today’s show, Mounk previews his book and explains how the identity trap harms freedom of speech.Mounk is known for his work on the rise of populism and the crisis of liberal democracy. He is a professor of the practice of international affairs at Johns Hopkins University and the author of five books. He is also the founder of the digital magazine Persuasion, a contributing editor at The Atlantic, and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Transcript:
https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-identity-trap-yascha-mounk
Timestamps:
0:00 - Introduction 1:35 - Origins of “the identity trap” 8:48 - What is “identity synthesis?” 12:26 - Is “cultural Marxism” a thing? / The intellectual history of identity synthesis 27:47 - Critical race theory 32:30 - Free speech culture 40:22 - Speech and violence 47:58 - The Law of Group Polarization 52:27 - How to escape the identity trapDiscussed intellectuals:
Derrick Bell
Kimberlé Crenshaw
Jacques Derrida
Michel Foucault
Christopher Rufo (Rufo’s book, “America’s Cultural Revolution,” and Nico’s review, “Christopher Rufo Became the Thing He Claims to Hate”)
Edward Said
Jean-Paul Sartre
Gayatri Spivak
Cass Sunstein (article: “The Law of Group Polarization”)
www.sotospeakpodcast.com
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@freespeechtalk
Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freespeechtalk/
Email us: [email protected] - Mostrar mais
