America’s legacy of unparalleled copyright protections and free market orientation has cultivated…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
“Blanket Licensing” – a Collectivist, Bureaucratic, One-Size-Fits-All Deprivation of Property Rights Proposal

America’s legacy of unparalleled copyright protections and free market orientation has cultivated a music industry unrivaled in today’s world or throughout human history.

From the first days of the phonograph, through the jazz age, through the rock era, through disco, through country, through hip-hop and every other popular musical iteration since its advent, it’s not by accident that we lead the world in the same manner in which we lead in such industries as cinema and television programming.  We can thank our nation’s emphasis on strong copyright protections.

Unfortunately, that reality doesn’t deter some activists from periodically advocating a more collectivist, top-down governmental reordering of the music industry in a way that would deprive artists and creators of their…[more]

July 06, 2020 • 02:32 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Liberal Opponents of Free Speech Suffer Another Humiliating Supreme Court Defeat Print
By Timothy H. Lee
Thursday, October 06 2016
While this marks the end of this tawdry episode, prosecutorial and governmental abuses like it are unfortunately becoming all too common.

Imagine the following harrowing scenario. 

In the predawn hours one morning, you and your family are jarred from your sleep by a deafening pounding at your front door.  Naturally disoriented, you peer out your window to the bewildering sight of multiple police vehicles, blinding lights flashing, with your neighbors gawking from their doorsteps at what's taking place at your house. 

When you open your door, armed officers rush into your children's rooms and hold you like some sort of dangerous fugitive.  As you sit helplessly for what seems like hours, police haul off all of your computers, files, phones and other personal belongings from every room in the house. 

As all of this is occurring, you're instructed that you're prohibited from mentioning any of this to family, friends or media under penalty of additional prosecution. 

You immediately ask yourself if this is some terrible case of mistaken identity, confident that neither you nor your spouse or children have committed any recent felonies to justify this frightening and humiliating spectacle.  But after they recite the search warrant, you realize that they do in fact have the correct address. 

They're indeed after you. 

And of what horrible crime are you accused?  Simply exercising your First Amendment freedom of political speech. 

Specifically, a partisan prosecutor has exploited an obscure state ordinance to allege "coordination" between the conservative non-profit organization with which you're associated and the governor of your state.  Not bribery, not embezzlement, not extortion.  Political activity.   

The allegation of misconduct is false, but that's of little comfort to you or your family at the moment. 

If the above scenario appears outlandish, it's exactly what happened in 2013 to Wisconsin Club for Growth Director Eric O'Keefe and others.  In all, 29 conservative and libertarian groups were targeted, including such sinister organizations as Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Americans for Prosperity, the League of American Voters, Wisconsin Family Action, American Crossroads, the Republican Governors Association, Friends of Scott Walker and the Republican Party of Wisconsin. 

Fortunately, some of the targets in this case decided to fight back. 

In addition to challenging the politicized and unconstitutional prosecution itself, O'Keefe and others affirmatively sued the four Milwaukee prosecutors and other officials who orchestrated the scheme in both their personal and official capacities. 

In a particularly harsh rebuke, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ultimately rejected the attempted prosecution and held that such tactics have no place in a democratic republic: 

The special prosecutor has disregarded the vital principle that in our nation and our state political speech is a fundamental right and is afforded the highest level of protection.  The special prosecutor's theories ... would assure that such political speech will be investigated with paramilitary-style home invasions conducted in the pre-dawn hours and  then prosecuted and punished.  In short, the special prosecutor completely ignores the command that, when seeking to regulate issue advocacy groups, such regulation must be done with 'narrow specificity.' 

It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing.  In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a 'perfect storm' of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them. 

Undeterred by that humiliating rebuke by the state's highest court, Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.  This week, however, the Supreme Court rejected his maniacal attempt to resuscitate his scheme and finally put the prosecution to rest. 

While this marks the end of this tawdry episode, prosecutorial and governmental abuses like it are unfortunately becoming all too common. 

Recall, for instance, the IRS scandal following revelation that it targeted conservative, libertarian and pro-Israel groups for improper treatment.  Or the effort among liberals in Congress and state attorneys general to prosecute scientists and groups that dare refute the global warming alarmism complex with actual evidence and scientific method.  Even elected officials aren't immune, as illustrated by the improper prosecutions of former Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Congressman Tom DeLay (R - Texas). 

This week, we at CFIF also achieved victory on behalf of the First Amendment freedoms of speech and association when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied Congressman Christopher Van Hollen's (D - Maryland) appeal of a ruling in our favor in a case involving free speech and compelled disclosures. 

All Americans who value the rights protected by the Constitution and oppose governmental abuse should welcome these victories, but also remain mindful of the critical importance of judicial nominations and court composition as another election day approaches. 

Question of the Week   
In which one of the following years was the National Park Service established?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
"Allowing third parties to collect election ballots, a term sometimes called 'ballot harvesting,' is unconstitutional if it creates 'wide opportunity for fraud,' Trump campaign senior legal adviser Jenna Ellis says.'I think that ballot harvesting is definitely opening up a ripe opportunity for fraud,' Ellis told Just the News in an interview, while acknowledging there is no language in the Constitution…[more]
—Carrie Sheffield, Just the News White House Correspondent
— Carrie Sheffield, Just the News White House Correspondent
Liberty Poll   

Do you currently expect your local schools to reopen on time in the fall?