So to Speak: The Free Speech Podcast

Imagine the government forcing you to label your all-natural milk product as “imitation.”  Florida tried to make one dairy farm do just that, sparking a First Amendment question: Where’s the line between a business’s right to speak and protecting consumers from deception? In this episode, we explore how far free speech protections go for commercial speech with: Justin Pearson, managing attorney (Institute for Justice) Bob Corn-Revere, chief counsel (FIRE) Eugene Volokh, Thomas M. Siebel senior fellow (Hoover Institution, Stanford) Timestamps:  00:00 Intro 05:03 What exactly is commercial speech? 08:25 The evolution of commercial speech law 13:59 Early regulation of commercial speech 23:03 What is false or misleading commercial speech? 26:04 Controversial regulations of non-misleading commercial speech 37:35 Future of commercial speech regulations Read the transcript: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-state-commercial-speech Coming up: Live episode of So To Speak  On Monday, August 11th at 4 p.m. Eastern Time, Nico will be speaking with former Treasury Secretary/Harvard University president, Larry Summers, and FIRE President/CEO, Greg Lukianoff. They will discuss the Trump administration's campaign against elite universities, including Harvard, what outcomes we can expect from that campaign, and what those outcomes might mean for free speech, academic freedom, and university independence. Register for the livestream here: https://thefire-org.zoom.us/webinar/register/5817544039734/WN_AISudjopTvu2Yzk2pXkDYg. Enjoy listening to the podcast? Donate to FIRE today and get exclusive content like member webinars, special episodes, and more. If you became a FIRE Member through a donation to FIRE at thefire.org and would like access to Substack’s paid subscriber podcast feed, please email sotospeak@thefire.org. Show notes: Commercial speech: Should it still receive unique constitutional treatment? FIRE (2025) “In 1995, Pepsi offered a $33 million fighter jet for 7 million Pepsi Points. They thought it was a joke. But this 21-year-old took them seriously, found a loophole, and demanded the fighter jet for his 7 million Pepsi Points.” So to Speak repost via X

Justin Amash, former Congressman and civil liberties advocate, shares insights from his political journey and upbringing as a Palestinian refugee's son. He discusses the essence of free speech, urging the necessity of embracing unpopular views for true dialogue. Amash reflects on his Congressional experiences, the shift in political norms, and the challenges of navigating a polarized environment. He emphasizes the importance of informed decision-making and encourages young leaders to engage in politics while upholding constitutional principles.

We’re checking in on the latest news in tech and free speech. We cover the state AI regulation moratorium that failed in Congress, the ongoing Character A.I. lawsuit, the Federal Trade Commission’s consent decree with Omnicom and Interpublic Group, the European Union’s Digital Services Act, and what comes next after the Supreme Court’s Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton decision. Guests: Ari Cohn — lead counsel for tech policy, FIRE Corbin Barthold — internet policy counsel, TechFreedom Timestamps:  00:00 Intro 02:38 State AI regulation moratorium fails in Congress 20:04 Character AI lawsuit 41:10 FTC, Omnicom x IPG merger, and Media Matters 56:09 Digital Services Act 01:02:43 FSC v. Paxton decision 01:10:49 Outro  Read the transcript here: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-tech-check-ai-moratorium-character-ai-lawsuit-ftc Enjoy listening to the podcast? Donate to FIRE today and get exclusive content like member webinars, special episodes, and more. If you became a FIRE Member through a donation to FIRE at thefire.org and would like access to Substack’s paid subscriber podcast feed, please email sotospeak@thefire.org. Show notes: “The AI will see you now” Paul Sherman (2025) Megan Garcia, plaintiff, v. Character Technologies, Inc. et. al., defendants, United States District Court (2025) Proposed amicus brief in support of appeal - Garcia v. Character Technologies, Inc. FIRE (2025) “Amplification and its discontents: Why regulating the reach of online content is hard” Daphne Kelly (2021) “Omnicom Group/The Interpublic Group of Co.” FTC (2025)

Will Creeley, Bob Corn-Revere, and Ronnie London from FIRE delve into the Supreme Court's ruling on age verification laws in relation to online adult content. They discuss the complex balance between protecting minors and safeguarding free speech rights. The conversation highlights the potential for increased identity-based access barriers and raises concerns over the ruling's implications for anonymous speech. They also question the Court's reliance on assumed needs for child protection without scientific backing, posing critical challenges for future online speech regulations.

Lee Levine, former senior counsel at Ballard Spahr and a First Amendment law expert, joins the discussion. They dive into the Supreme Court's backing of Maine lawmaker Laurel Libby regarding free speech and transgender issues. The conversation also highlights NPR's lawsuit against the Trump administration's funding cuts, challenging public broadcasting integrity. Another fascinating topic is a middle school student’s 'there are only two genders' T-shirt that stirred controversy, illustrating ongoing tensions in student free speech rights.

Heather Mac Donald, a Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of "When Race Trumps Merit," shares her insights on free speech issues during the Trump administration. She discusses her own experiences of being silenced and highlights the plight of canceled professors like Amy Wax and Carole Hooven. Mac Donald critiques Trump’s controversial interactions with the media and his executive orders impacting law firms. She raises concerns about campus censorship while advocating for open dialogue and the protection of dissenting viewpoints.

Joining the discussion are Greg Lukianoff, the President and CEO of FIRE and co-author of "The Canceling of the American Mind," and Rikki Schlott, a New York Post columnist. They delve into the evolving nature of cancel culture, reflecting on its ties to academic freedom and personal anecdotes. The duo also weighs in on high-profile cancelation cases and the impact of social media in shaping public opinion. Is cancel culture on the decline? They explore this provocative question and advocate for dialogue over demands for cancellation.

David Rabban, a distinguished teaching professor at The University of Texas, and Erwin Chemerinsky, dean at UC Berkeley Law, tackle critical issues surrounding academic freedom and government influence on universities. They discuss the implications of funding threats faced by prestigious institutions like Harvard and Columbia, analyzing the tensions between First Amendment rights and federal mandates. The conversation also delves into viewpoint diversity, discrimination laws, and the evolving landscape of higher education, highlighting the risks and future of federal funding.

We travel from America to Europe, Russia, China, and more places to answer the question: Is there a global free speech recession?  Guests: - Sarah McLaughlin: FIRE senior scholar, global expression - James Kirchick: FIRE senior fellow - Jacob Mchangama: FIRE senior fellow Timestamps:  00:00 Intro 03:52 Free speech global surveys 07:49 Freedom of expression deteriorating 11:43 Misinformation and disinformation 18:05 Russian state-sponsored media 24:55 Europe’s Digital Services Act 29:26 Chinese censorship 34:33 Radio Free Europe 54:57 Mohammad cartoons 01:04:14 Outro Read the transcript here. Enjoy listening to the podcast? Donate to FIRE today and get exclusive content like member webinars, special episodes, and more. If you became a FIRE Member through a donation to FIRE at thefire.org and would like access to Substack’s paid subscriber podcast feed, please email sotospeak@thefire.org. Show notes: - Authoritarians in the academy: How the internationalization of higher education and borderless censorship threaten free speech Sarah McLaughlin (2025)  - “The First Amendment created gay America” So to Speak (2022) - “Secret city: The hidden history of gay Washington” James Kirchick (2022) - “Who in the world supports free speech?” The Future of Free Speech (2025) - “V-DEM democracy report 2025: 25 years of autocratization — democracy trumped?” V-Dem Institute (2025) - Global risks report 2024 World Economic Forum (2025) - “Gay reporter kicked off Kremlin network after protesting anti-gay law” Washington Free Beacon (2013) - Free speech: A history from Socrates to social media (paperback) Jacob Mchangama (2025) - Europe's Digital Services Act (DSA) (2022) - Careless people: A cautionary tale of power, greed, and lost idealism Sarah Wynn-Williams (2025) - “The Voice of America falls silent” The New York Times (2025) - Text of Havel’s speech to Congress The Washington Post (1990) - Voice of America wins in court, for now, as judge blocks Trump administration from firing staff AP News (2025)

Will Creeley, legal director at FIRE, and Conor Fitzpatrick, supervising senior attorney at FIRE, dive into the intricate tensions between free speech and institutional pressures. They discuss Columbia University's controversial response to federal funding cuts over anti-Semitism allegations, the implications of the Mahmoud Khalil deportation case, and the chilling effects of DEI policies on dissent in academia. The conversation also touches on the risks of using funding to control political narratives and the essential role of due process in safeguarding civil liberties.