Josh Bleisch

Defender of civil liberties; @WabashCollege devotee; #bikedc, constantly giving dirty looks to reckless drivers. Views my own.

[Will Creeley @WillatFIRE]

The First Amendment protects our right to film law enforcement. Officers are public servants paid by our taxes to uphold the law.

When the exercise of First Amendment rights results in detention, let alone execution, officers have violated the law.

These are evil, lawless days.

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

VICTORY! The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today delivered a decisive victory for the First Amendment rights of public university faculty in Reges v. Cauce. Reversing a federal district court’s opinion, the Ninth Circuit held University of Washington officials violated the First Amendment when they punished Professor Stuart Reges for substituting his satirical take on the university’s preferred “land acknowledgment” statement on his syllabus.

On Dec. 8, 2021, Reges criticized land acknowledgment statements in an email to faculty, and on Jan. 3, 2022, he parodied UW’s model statement in his syllabus: “I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington.” Reges’s statement was a nod to John Locke’s philosophical theory that property rights are established by labor.

Represented by FIRE, Reges filed a First Amendment lawsuit in July 2022 challenging the university’s actions, which included a months-long “harassment” investigation. University officials created a competing class, so students wouldn’t have to take a computer science class from someone who didn’t parrot the university’s preferred opinions.

“Today’s opinion is a resounding victory for Professor Stuart Reges and the First Amendment rights of public university faculty,” said FIRE attorney Gabe Walters. “The Ninth Circuit agreed with what FIRE has said from the beginning: Universities can’t force professors to parrot an institution’s preferred political views under pain of punishment.”

Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Daniel Bress stated: “A public university investigated, reprimanded, and threatened to discipline a professor for contentious statements he made in a class syllabus. The statements, which mocked the university’s model syllabus statement on an issue of public concern, caused offense in the university community. Yet debate and disagreement are hallmarks of higher education. Student discomfort with a professor’s views can prompt discussion and disapproval. But this discomfort is not grounds for the university retaliating against the professor. We hold that the university’s actions toward the professor violated his First Amendment rights.”

That’s exactly right.

“Today’s opinion recognizes that sometimes, ‘exposure to views that distress and offend is a form of education unto itself,’” said FIRE Legal Director Will Creeley. “As we always say at FIRE: If you graduate from college without once being offended, you should ask for your money back.”

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE recognizes that colleges and universities play a vital role in preserving free thought within a free society. To this end, we place a special emphasis on defending the individual rights of students and faculty members on our nation’s campuses, including freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience.

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

After @IndianaUniv stationed military-grade snipers on a rooftop at an encampment last year, FIRE didn’t think the state of free speech on their campus could get worse.

Turns out rock bottom has a basement. Now, we need your help.

[Ryne Weiss @RynoWeiss]

Did @IndianaUniv censor a student publication for reporting on the university's poor ranking in @TheFIREorg's free speech rankings?

If so, do administrators see the irony? And the fact that this can only hurt their ranking next year?

[Josh Bleisch @JoshBleisch]

So proud of my friends and former colleagues at @TheFIREorg. A righteous fight.

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

BREAKING: FIRE is suing Secretary of State Marco Rubio, challenging the laws he is using to target lawfully present noncitizens for speech protected by the Constitution.

No administration should be able to deport lawfully present noncitizens for their opinions.

[Ari Cohn @AriCohn]

Within a matter of sentences, DHS manages to deny the allegations and then...outright admit to them.

[Greg Y. Gonzalez @gygonzalez]

Me in @TheHillOpinion:

The Supreme Court made your rights harder to defend — Congress must now step up https://t.co/UJ9MT36NeJ

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

BREAKING: Joined by a coalition of civil liberties groups, FIRE filed a friend of the court brief today rebuking the U.S. government for detaining Mahmoud Khalil for his free speech.

Jailing people for their political expression betrays America’s commitment to free speech.

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

VICTORY! The 9th Circuit ruled in favor of FIRE client Lars Jensen, a math professor unconstitutionally punished for criticizing what he believed was his college’s decision to water down its math standards.

This decision is a significant victory for faculty free speech rights.🧵

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

BREAKING: FIRE sues on behalf of a student group to block an unconstitutional ban on drag shows across the Texas A&M system.

The Board of Regents says drag “promotes gender ideology” contrary to its “values,” but public university officials cannot dictate students’ ideologies.

[Will Creeley @WillatFIRE]

"Politicians are allowed to criticize the press — that is free speech, too, and there is nothing new about it — but there is a difference between using language and using muscle."

That's right. And this @nytimes editorial is timely and important.

https://t.co/ppBHHueeZH

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

After getting a court order forcing the Clarksdale Press Register to take down an editorial criticizing city officials, Clarksdale, MS, voted on Monday to drop its lawsuit against the paper.

This comes after FIRE called attention to the shockingly unconstitutional act.

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

STATEMENT: The city of Clarksdale, Mississippi, thinks it knows better than the Founders. Clarksdale asked a court to order a local newspaper to remove an editorial asking why the city was not being more transparent about a proposed tax increase. As a result of the city’s lawsuit, a court ordered the Clarksdale Press Register to delete the online editorial.

That’s unconstitutional. In the United States, the government can’t determine what opinions may be shared in the public square. A free society does not permit governments to sue newspapers for publishing editorials.

FIRE is exploring all options to aid the Press Register in defending these core expressive rights.

[Ari Cohn @AriCohn]

Fact check: reporting the publicly-available names DOGE "employees" who are helping you access sensitive government information as a non-government employee is absolutely, 1000%, indisputably not a crime.

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

VICTORY: The United States Supreme Court throws out the Fifth Circuit’s decision dismissing citizen journalist Priscilla Villarreal’s lawsuit and sends it back for review.

This has major implications for Americans’ First Amendment rights.

[Goseg Train Thread @wvistheduck]

When it's $2 bus fare evasion, local news runs stories saying illegal behavior is "out of control"

When it's Lexus drivers blocking hundreds of thousands of working class DMVers from getting to work on time, local news runs stories saying enforcement is "out of control" 🤔🚩

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

LAWSUIT: With FIRE’s help, an Arizona mom is suing the City of Surprise, AZ., after the mayor ordered her arrest for questioning a pay raise for a city official.

In America, the last thing citizens should fear when they attend public meetings is leaving in handcuffs.

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

VICTORY: Colorado officials kicked @jeffhunt out of the Senate gallery for wearing a Pro-Life U sweatshirt because it was a “political statement.”

Thanks to FIRE’s advocacy, state House and Senate leadership have rescinded the ban on “political” apparel in the Capitol galleries.

[Billy Binion @billybinion]

Looks like after the anti–cancel culture warriors got their pitchforks out & targeted this random guy, he not only lost his job, but his family/friends were threatened with violence & the fire dept received a bomb threat.

If you're celebrating this as a win, rethink some things.

[FIRE @TheFIREorg]

Colorado officials kicked Jeff Hunt out of the Senate gallery for wearing a sweatshirt that read “Pro-Life U.”

Now, FIRE demands the sergeants-at-arms allow Coloradans to silently express their opinions by wearing pins or clothing in the Capitol’s legislative galleries — or face a lawsuit.