Mediaboss Marketing

BLOG

UAW and other unions withdrew their effort to overthrow a new rule in Michigan that will requre public employees to opt-in on an annual basisas a condition for the state to collect union dues. In early October, U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh denied unions a preliminary injuction.

If the state may completely prohibit payroll deductions for union dues without running afoul of the First Amendment, it follows that a yearly reauthorization requirement for payroll deductions also does not implicate the First Amendment, Steeh wrote. [T]he State is not constitutionally obligated to provide payroll deductions at all.

Common (and Constitutional) sense prevailed, but the suit raises some important questions too. Why are taxpayers still footing the bill for private dues collection? Why won't some unions accept the principle of voluntary association?

When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2018's Janus v ASFCME that government employees could not be forced to join a public employee union or be forced to pay dues and fees if they refused, the Court was simply affirming that government employees did not surrender their constitutional rights as a condition of employment. Prior to Janus, state and local goverrnmnets would generally force employees into becoming union members or paying the union fees if they opted out. These unions are private organizations, yet had the strong arm of government to enforce membership and take dues money direct from their paychecks.

In 2018, following the Janus ruling, King 5 interviewed Lynne Dodson, the Secretary Treasurer of the Washington State Labor Council AFL-CIO, who said, "We need to focus on talking with our members showing what the value is with unions. I think it will grow power and numbers we have. We will do much more direct talking and organizing,

Her sentiment is the right one and it is the one other private organizations have, which is that you need to persuade people your organization is of value and worth joining. Government union backed critics of WPC like to point to membership renewals amongst government employees as indicating of our "failure" on Janus policy. They fail to grasp the point that voluntary membership is fine-- but forced membership is not.

Annual renewal of membership allows for better accountability, prevents creating obstuctions to members who wish to opt-out, and is a small price to pay for taxpayers footing the bill for your membership dues collection.

Speaking of annual memberships, have you renewed your WPC membership yet?

See original here:
A victory for the First Amendment and workers in Michigan - Washington Policy

Ken Paulson, opinion columnist for USA Today, discusses the First Amendment.

Editor's Note:This column originally appeared in USA Today.

Can you imagine a U.S. Supreme Court nominee being unable to explain the Second Amendment? Or drawing a blank on the ruling in Roe v. Wade?

That would lead to cries of outrage, a 24-news cycle and in all likelihood, the withdrawal of the nomination.

But when Judge Amy Coney Barrett struggled to name all the freedoms of the First Amendment and Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska)tried to help her out with the wrong answer, it was barely a blip on Twitter.

It began today when Sasse tossed Barrett what presumably was intended as a softball question: What are the five freedoms of the First Amendment?

Barretts response: Speech, religion, press, assembly.Speech, press, religion, assembly (now counting on her hands) I dont know. What am I missing?

She turned to the wrong person for a lifeline. Sasse quickly said, redress or protest.

Then came the most astonishing moment of all. A relieved Barrett said Oh, OK.

Oh, OK? Not quite.The fifth freedom is the right to petition government for redress of grievances, a guarantee close to the hearts of lobbyists. The right to protest is not one of the five freedoms, but it can be used in tandem with all of those rights.

Dont get me wrong. Ive had the privilege to testify before a Congressional committee, and Ive been interviewed live on national television. Both can be nerve-wracking experiences. If I were to do both at the same time, with my future and that of the Supreme Court at stake, Im pretty sure I would struggle to remember my middle name. Of course, if the interviewer offered up the wrong middle name, Im pretty sure I would catch that.

That said, it was a mental lapse and not the crime of the century. In the end, this isnt about a judge or a senator.

Its about the First Amendment. Its five freedoms are at the heart of the American experience, giving each of us the right to express ourselves freely and to exercise our personal faith, while providing the tools needed to keep a check on the abuse of government power.

But instead of that bundling of rights making the First an untouchable amendment, it does just the opposite. The First Amendment has no clout.

The news media are all in on freedom of the press. Churches and religious organizations will readily fight for freedom of religion. Support for freedom of speech tends to be based on what is being said. Assembly is a popular freedom in the abstract, unless civil unrest looms in highly visible cities. For what its worth, the right of petition is just fine.

The First Amendment has no single constituency, and thats a problem.

When journalists assert their right to freedom of the press but rarely write about incursions on faith, thats a problem.

When people of faith are outraged by COVID-19 limits on church attendance and dismiss the news media as fake news, thats a problem.

When a university proclaims itself to be a marketplace of ideas and tries to limit assembly to a free speech zone, thats a problem.

When someone uses their free speech at full volume on social media, only to demand the firing of public figures who do the same, thats a problem.

Our rights to speech, press, religion, assembly and petition are embodied in the most important 45 words in American history. Those freedoms are buffeted, though, by those who choose to embrace the First Amendment selectively.

The Second Amendment poses no such problem. It is clearly about the right to bear arms, though the whole militia business muddies things up a bit. Its constituency is clear and powerful (see the right to petition).

Sasse followed up with a second question to Barrett about the First Amendment, asking if she knew why the five freedoms were packaged in a single amendment.

I don't know why, actually, Barrett responded. Im sure there's a story that I don't know there about why those appeared in the First Amendment all together rather than being split up in different amendments.

And this was where the previously imprecise senator nailed it.

You don't really have freedom of religion if you don't also have freedom of assembly, Sasse explained. You don't really have freedom of speech if you can't also publish your beliefs and advocate for them. You don't really have any of those freedoms if you can't protest at times and seek to redress grievances in times when government oversteps and tries to curtail any of those freedoms.

The very best way to protect your favorite First Amendment freedom is to take a stand for all of them. That requires respecting the exercise of free expression in all its forms, even if the expression isnt to your liking. That mindset would contribute to a more civil society and more consistent support for the amendment that makes Americas ideals possible. It may also prove handy for a future Supreme Court nominee.

Ken Paulson is the director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University, a former editor of USA Today and a member of USA Today's Board of Contributors.

View original post here:
Guest Column: The First Amendment has no single constituency, and that's a problem - Iowa State Daily

Dear Editor,

Ours is not a theocracy. Ours is a representative democracy. Our nation was founded, in part, in response to the religious tyranny experienced by its new citizens in the countries from which theyd fled. Thus, commitment to the separation of church and state was vital. This meant our nation would never establish a national church nor show preference for any one religion.

Our 1st Amendment not only protects speech, it also protects four other rights, among them religious liberty. It begins, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Respect for religious liberty is even more critical today than it was in 1787, as our nation is now vastly more diverse.

Which brings me to the topic of abortion.

When and under what circumstances abortion should be legal is a highly nuanced and contentious issue. For the religion of my mother, an embryo was to be protected absolutely from the moment of conception. It was believed, too, that the prohibition against direct abortion at any time during pregnancy and for any reason should not just be a personal religious/moral decision, but legally prohibited for allregardless of the embryos or fetuss viability, regardless of the threat to the mothers life, and regardless of an individuals religious convictions.

The dilemma for me as a citizen is whether my own personal religious beliefs, and/or those of my mother, should be imposed on everyone else regardless of their own theology. Personally, I think not, absolutely.

Denise Fazio, Ed.D.,Boulder County

Like Loading...

Originally posted here:
First Amendment rights The Mountain-Ear - The Mountain -Ear

Benjamin Grieco and Mikayla Green, student co-directors for the 2020 Lewis B. ODonnell Media Summit, are part of a student team organizing an all-star group to discuss On the Front Lines with the First Amendment on Wednesday, Oct. 28.

OSWEGO The 2020 edition of SUNY Oswegos Lewis B. ODonnell Media Summit will convene an all-star group to discuss On the Front Lines with the First Amendment on Wednesday, Oct. 28.

The centerpiece panel presentation will take place virtually at 3:30 p.m. via Zoom, and will feature Connie Schultz, a Pulitzer-Prize winning, nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate; Oswego alumna Michelle Garcia, editorial manager of NBC News NBC BLK, which which tells stories by, for and about the Black community; Bret Jaspers, politics reporter for KERA Public Media in Dallas-Fort Worth; Steve Brown, investigative reporter at WGRZ in Buffalo; and Ava Lubell, a Legal Fellow at the Cornell Law School First Amendment Clinic. Communication studies faculty member Michael Riecke will serve as moderator.

Student co-directors Mikayla Green and Benjamin Grieco noted that when they and the rest of the team were looking at themes for the 16th annual summit, they watched the world in which journalists operate change so much in a few months, as the press adapted to covering and telling the stories of COVID-19, the Black Lives Matter movement, the upcoming election and so many compelling, fast-moving stories.

We were told to aim high, said Grieco, a senior journalism major and editor in chief of The Oswegonian. Our guests dont have to travel, which makes it easier. We could ask, Do you have four hours to talk to these students who are really interested in what you have to say?

Especially with the summit coming just days before such a pivotal election, the virtual arrangement helped secure a high caliber of participants, they noted.

Distinguished panelA popular panelist at a previous summit, Schultz also is a Professional in Residence at Kent State University School of Journalism. She won the Pulitzer Prize in 2005 for Commentary for columns that judges praised for providing a voice for the underdog and the underprivileged. She also won the Robert F. Kennedy Award for Social Justice Reporting and the Batten Medal, which honors a body of journalistic work that reflects compassion, courage, humanity and a deep concern for the underdog. Schultz is the author of three books published by Random House, plus her first novel, The Daughters of Erietown, a New York Times bestseller.

Over the last decade, Garcia has covered major social movements across the United States including the fight for marriage equality, #MeToo and the Black Lives Matter movement, to name a few. The 2006 SUNY Oswego journalism graduate and former Oswegonian editor in chief was named to Folios list of 20 in their 20s, won a GLAAD Media Award with her staff about the advancement of the HIV treatment drug Truvada, taught at CUNY Graduate School of Journalism and has coached several successful writers along the way. Previously, Garcia was an editor at Vice, Out, Vox, Mic and The Advocate.

Jaspers stories have aired on the BBC, NPRs All Things Considered, Morning Edition, Weekend Edition, and Here & Now, and APMs Marketplace. He previously reported on politics and the Colorado River basin for KJZZ in Phoenix, and before that was managing editor at WSKG in upstate New York. Awards include three 2020 Regional Murrow Awards for reporting at KJZZ, one for Hard News, and two as part of KJZZs series Tracing the Migrant Journey. That series also won a 2020 Kaleidoscope Award for excellence in covering an issue of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender.

Brown has spent a lifetime in journalism after graduating from Canisius College in 1983. He has been honored with multiple award including six regional Murrow Awards, four of which he collected while working for 2 On-Your-Side. In 2019, he won a national Murrow Award for his short documentary about a man who sought to have the Catholic Church admit a priest was his biological father. Before coming in Buffalo, Brown spent 15 years as a correspondent for Fox News.

Lubell provides pro bono legal advice to NYC metro area journalists on a range of First Amendment issues arising from newsgathering and publication. Previously, Lubell served as the General Counsel of Quartz Media, which focuses on global business news and has reporters based in cities around the world. She previously also worked at Slate as general manager and general counsel; as special assistant for briefing under New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, and as the political director for the Women and Politics Institute at American University. She is an affiliate member of the NYC Bar Association Communications and Media Law Committee.

Keeping connectionsThe panelists traditionally visit classrooms on the day of the event, and that is something organizers plan to continue via Zoom rooms.

I remember being a freshman and knowing that someone will show up to your class and tell some really cool stories, said Green, a senior broadcasting major and vice president of production for WTOP-TV 10. Im glad we can still do that.

The popular Career Connectors component is still in the plan, this time in a virtual environment where current students can talk to recent graduates in the industry and network on a one-on-one basis.

This years Career Connectors include Natalie Brophy 17, a reporter for Gannett/USA Today Network; Imani Cruz 17, talent and development, MTV Networks; Justin Dobrow 17, program operations manager, Peacock for NBCUniversal Media; Stephanie Herbert 18, media director for MOST (Museum of Science and Technology) in Syracuse; Allif Karim 18, sports director for WDVM-TV in Maryland; and Omy Melo 14, junior editor at Nickelodeon.

As different as everything is this year, we do want to keep it familiar, Green said. But one way we can change it is to make it even more open virtually.

We dont really want to change that tradition or standard, Grieco added. Were trying to maintain that legacy. It may be virtual, but everything else is, so why cant we keep doing the same things?

Organizers expect student media WTOP and WNYO to broadcast the Zoom feed of the panel discussion as well.

Louis A. Borrelli Jr., a pioneer in cable television, online media and broadcast production services and a 1977 Oswego graduate, made a founding gift for the media summit in 2005. Two years later, 1976 graduate Al Roker, the national weather anchor and co-host of the third hour of NBCs Today show, provided additional funding to rename the summit in memory of longtime professor Dr. Lewis B. ODonnell, a seminal figure in the college experiences of Borrelli, Roker and many others.

The annual School of Communication, Media and the Arts highlight is organized by a student team with journalism faculty member Brian Moritz serving as advisor.

For more information, visit MediaSummit.org.

Like Loading...

Related

See the article here:
SUNY Oswego Media Summit To Explore 'On The Front Lines With The First Amendment' - Oswego Daily News

Graphic by Owensboro Times

Every statewide elected official takes an oath to uphold the constitutions of the United States andthe Commonwealth of Kentucky. As your elected State Treasurer, I have the addedresponsibility of watching all state expenditures, billions of dollars every year, and making surethat your taxpayer dollars are not being used in a way that violates the Constitution.

In recent weeks, there have been stories circulating nationwide about the efforts of the Archbishop of San Francisco to overturn the punitive limits imposed on churches by the mayorof San Francisco. The last few days have seen a resurgence in the targeting of Orthodox Jewishcommunities in New York, as well as other houses of worship, by imposing hard caps of 10 and 25 people per service, regardless of the size of the church or synagogue. As efforts to protectcivil liberties in those areas moves forward, we must remember that the targeting of religiousexercise by state and local officials is not limited to the coastal blue states.

Kentucky, whose politics will never be confused with New York or California, has itself seenmultiple federal courts strike down executive orders issued by Gov. Andy Beshear, on the grounds that the orders limiting religious services, travel, or protest, violated the fundamental,constitutional rights of Kentuckians. In any other time in our history, a series of defeats of thismagnitude would have been met with much greater attention and demand for accountability.

Due to my role as a watchdog of public spending, I directed my office to review the way taxpayer dollars were being spent to enforce the administrations questionable executive ordersrelating to First Amendment activities. Protecting our Commonwealth and its great citizens need not be done at the expense of the First Amendment. It is possible to protect the Commonwealth while respecting, and adhering to, a principle upon which this country was founded. My office requested information from a number of health departments around the Commonwealth, and received responses from several departments, as well as the Kentucky State Police.

Our investigation uncovered numerous instances of law enforcement being used to monitor orshut down faith-based services; derogatory or confrontational comments made about religious exercise by those in leadership; and selective, targeted enforcement of mass gathering prohibitions, in violation of the First Amendment. The actions taken at a local level seem to be directly correlated to the decisions made, and the tone set, by the Governors administration in Frankfort, which itself has too often used daily briefings and press releases as opportunities to disparage or threaten any person or institution that questions the legality and appropriateness ofthe administrations orders.

On Oct. 22, I will be presenting my offices findings to the Interim Joint Committee onJudiciary in Frankfort. This will be an opportunity for legislators to consider what we haveuncovered in relation to executive actions during last few months, and for the public to learnmore about how taxpayer dollars have been spent to enforce arbitrary government orders.

Kentuckians have established a constitution and laws that demand respect for the FirstAmendment rights of all citizens, regardless of their religious or political beliefs. During the1930s, as our nation was trapped within the economic catastrophe of the Great Depression, andfacing the rise of dangerous forces around the world, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughesreminded the country that [t]he Constitution was adopted in a period of great emergency. Heastutely noted that [e]mergency does not create power and that [e]mergency does not increasegranted power. The extraordinary challenges presented in 2020 do not provide justification forexpanding the Governors powers, or for ignoring the fundamental tenets that separate ourdemocracy from failed and oppressive autocratic states arounds the world.

The First Amendment must be vigorously defended by all elected officials, particularly in times of emergency, when it is the easiest for the government to justify unconstitutional restrictions. Iencourage every Kentuckian to continue to demand that our government adhere to the constitution and laws of the Commonwealth, and I look forward to continuing to serve the Commonwealth as your State Treasurer.

Written by Kentucky State Treasurer Allison Ball

Link:
Letter to the Editor: Government suppression of First Amendment during pandemic - The Owensboro Times