So to Speak: The Free Speech Podcast

Changes at the Pentagon, Charlie Kirk and cancel culture, free speech and misinformation, globalized censorship, Indiana University, how to support FIRE, and more! Timestamps: 00:00 Introductions 02:11 What is the Press Clause, and who does it apply to? 05:53 FIRE's position on Oklahoma student grading incident 08:50 What does FIRE need from Members besides financial support? 15:59 FIRE's College Free Speech Rankings and what they mean 19:44 What is the latest on the Ann Seltzer cases? 22:08 What is FIRE's view on the Pentagon press room changes? 24:50 What is the value of small donations? How can FIRE supporters volunteer? 29:21 Indiana University is good at football but bad at free speech 33:46 Are courts trending in a more speech-protective direction? 37:05 Charlie Kirk and cancel culture 39:20 Pro- and anti-Zionist speech and "hostile environment" harassment 43:48 Is "globalize the intifada" incitement? 45:07 How does FIRE distinguish between free speech and misinformation? 47:54 Can FIRE help supporters start free speech alumni groups? 48:55 Free speech, artificial intelligence, and copyright/trademarks 51:51 The sordid legacy of Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier 53:22 Staying hopeful amidst so much hypocrisy 55:32 Global speech platforms and censorship 58:14 Differences between FIRE and the ACLU? 59:34 Does FIRE have a Substack? (The Eternally Radical Idea, So to Speak, Expression) 1:00:03 Closing remarks. Joining us: Alisha Glennon, chief operating officer Nico Perrino, executive vice president Greg Lukianoff, president and ceo Will Creeley, legal director Become a paid subscriber today to receive invitations to future live webinars. 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.

Brad Smith, former Federal Election Commission chairman and now at the Institute for Free Speech, joins Brett Nolan, a senior attorney from the same institute, to delve into pivotal Supreme Court cases on donor disclosure and campaign finance. They discuss the significance of donor privacy, warning against the chilling effect of public disclosure. The duo also critiques limits on party spending, arguing money is a form of speech. Their insights shed light on the future legal landscape for campaign finance, emphasizing the importance of protecting First Amendment rights.

FIRE's Ronnie London and Conor Fitzpatrick join the show to discuss the Supreme Court's oral argument in the conversion therapy case, the Pentagon's new press rules, Indiana University's censorship rampage, and where the situation stands with visa and green card holders who say things the feds don't like. Timestamps: 00:00 Intro 01:19 Chiles v. Salazar, the conversion therapy case 30:03 The Pentagon's new press rules 48:48 What the hell is going on at Indiana University? 55:38 Feds boot noncitizens for Charlie Kirk speech 01:05:02 Outro Enjoy listening to the podcast? Donate to FIRE today (https://www.thefire.org/) 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.

Join Greg Lukianoff, president of FIRE and free speech advocate, along with Nadine Strossen, former ACLU president and legal scholar, as they dissect ten compelling arguments against free speech. They explore the notion that 'words are violence' and how it shapes campus discourse. The duo discusses the fine line between dangerous speech and censorship, and why free speech is vital for all viewpoints. They tackle the misuse of hate speech laws and the importance of adapting free speech principles to the digital age. Their insights are thought-provoking and essential.

FIRE Senior Scholar Sarah McLaughlin discusses her new book, "Authoritarians in the Academy: How the Internationalization of Higher Education and Borderless Censorship Threaten Free Speech." Timestamps: 00:00 Intro 01:17 Book origins 03:38 How China censored speech on American campuses 18:36 COVID's impact for international students' speech 22:05 What is sensitivity exploitation? 25:35 Free speech at international satellite campuses 31:28 Attempted deportations of Mahmoud Khalil and Rümeysa Öztürk 36:52 Sarah's free speech inspirations: literature and people About the Guest: Learn more about Sarah McLaughlin and her work. Get the Book: Purchase Authoritarians in the Academy here. Read the transcript here: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-transcript-authoritarians-academy Enjoy listening to the podcast? Donate to FIRE today (https://www.thefire.org/) 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.

What is the Federal Communications Commission, and why does its chairman think the agency can regulate Jimmy Kimmel's jokes? Note: Shortly after recording this episode, Nexstar and Sinclair announced they would return "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" to their stations. Joining us: Anna Gomez, FCC Commissioner Ronnie London, FIRE General Counsel Bob Corn-Revere, FIRE Chief Counsel Timestamps: 00:00 Intro 04:46 What's the FCC? 07:35 What's the "public interest" standard? 14:20 What is the "fairness doctrine"? 25:21 What is the "broadcast hoax" rule? 28:55 What is "news distortion"? 35:31 Role of network affiliates 41:15 What happens now? Read the transcript here: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-what-going-fcc 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.

FIRE staff also take your questions on Charlie Kirk's assassination, President Trump's lawsuit against The New York Times, cancel culture, and more. Timestamps: 00:00 Intro 01:42 Attorney General Pam Bondi's comments that "hate speech" is distinct from "free speech" 02:23 Is it OK for the Department of Justice to target people for "hate speech"? 05:42 How have "hate speech" laws played out overseas? 07:19 President Trump's response to Pam Bondi's "hate speech" remarks 08:50 Are "fighting words," "incitement," and "true threats" free speech? 11:22 What about doxxing? 15:15 Is it free speech to celebrate or condone the assassination of Charlie Kirk? 21:52 The termination of k-12 and university faculty in response to their commentary on Kirk's assassination 28:40 Is there a law that might implicate the Discord users who had reason to be aware of malicious intentions the shooter had towards Kirk ahead of the assassination? 30:05 The agency of speakers and those hearing their speech under the incitement standard 31:14 What are the differences between the free speech rights of citizens and non-citizens? 36:20 Does a court filing by President Trump as an individual in the New York Times lawsuit open him up to being deposed about a wide range of behaviors and actions? 37:40 What is the Trump's administration's legal strategy with the New York Times lawsuit? 39:24 What is FIRE doing about private employees being fired for their political commentary? 46:50 What is Charlie Kirk's legacy on free speech? 50:04 What is the difference between the academic protections enjoyed by tenured and non-tenured faculty members? 52:05 Does FIRE trust the Supreme Court to protect free speech? 56:12 How can we prevent capitulation from The New York Times? 59:20 How can ordinary people safely express their opinions on social media and promote civil discourse? Joining us: Ronnie London, general counsel Sarah McLaughlin, senior scholar, global expression Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy

We're joined by award-winning author, Charles (Charlie) Slack, to discuss his book, Liberty's First Crisis: Adams, Jefferson and the Misfits Who Saved Free Speech. Slack focuses on the infamous Sedition Act of 1798, which sparked the first major controversy over freedom of speech in America. Timestamps: 00:00 Intro (including note about Charlie Kirk) 03:59 Book origins 12:05 What were the Alien and Sedition Acts? 16:00 Prosecutions under the Act and their free speech implications 25:35 Free speech during the Revolutionary era 28:14 Adams' perspective on the Sedition Act 46:02 Was Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase a partisan hack? 53:57 Sedition Act fallout 01:01:02 Outro Read the transcript: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/so-speak-podcast-transcript-americas-first-free-speech-crisis-sedition-act-1798 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.

Join David French, a conservative legal commentator, and Sarah Isgur, a legal journalist and podcast host, as they delve into the delicate dance of presidential power and free speech. They explore the limits of executive authority, especially in the context of national security and social media. The duo also discusses the friction between free speech principles and institutional governance, highlighting how broad enforcement can chill public service. Plus, they touch on the evolving conservative legal movement amid the MAGA phenomenon.

Samantha Barbas, a University of Iowa Law Professor, dives into the historical battle between civil rights and hate speech laws. She illustrates how groups like the NAACP confronted hate speech, particularly through episodes like the Skokie protest against a Nazi march. Barbas examines milestones such as the backlash against 'The Birth of a Nation' and Henry Ford's antisemitic publications. The conversation also touches on contemporary challenges in free speech, including college students' fears of saying the wrong thing, and how these tensions influence public discourse.