On Tuesday, Republican House members sent a letter to PayPal asking for information about a controversial policy the company considered enacting that would essentially punish users for engaging in speech the company disagrees with:

The letter demanded that PayPal send House Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee and Financial Services Committee written answers to 15 questions about the circumstances surrounding the “Acceptable Use Policy,” which was published by PayPal on Oct. 8. The questions demand PayPal to name those who drafted the policy, who had the authority to approve it, and whether PayPal had coordinated with the Biden administration regarding it. . .

While they still have the chance, Senate Democrats are ramping up efforts to trample the First Amendment rights of nonprofits and their donors through the DISCLOSE Act. As RNLA highlighted last week, the DISCLOSE Act would cause many more problems than it solves. A letter submitted to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on Monday by People United for Privacy (PUFP) serves to debunk many of the misleading arguments made by proponents of the legislation during a hearing held by the Committee last week. PUFP's main points are as follows:

Just days after Georgetown University Law Center reinstated Ilya Shapiro after a four-month-long investigation for an ill-worded tweet, Shapiro proudly resigned.  Georgetown reinstated Shapiro based on the technicality that he was not yet an employee when he tweeted negatively about Biden's narrow-minded pool of potential SCOTUS nominees, a move that led students and faculty at the law school to protest him being hired.  But in resigning, Shapiro is standing up for free speech, contrary to Georgetown Law Center’s spineless actions, which were not based on law school policy but rather based in part on an effort to avoid "woke" student backlash.  As FIRE points out:

When Georgetown reinstated Shapiro, it said that university policies did not apply to him when he tweeted on Jan. 26, as his employment was to begin Feb. 1. The university reasoned it could not punish him for tweets made when he was not a university employee. As Shapiro said in his resignation letter, Georgetown investigated him for four months when the situation “apparently could’ve been resolved by looking at a calendar.” Georgetown’s investigation was primarily calendar based, concluding just days after its academic calendar ended — and just days after commencement, when the majority of students left campus for the summer. (emphasis added).

This Friday at 2:00 p.m. ET, RNLA will host a webinar titled, "The Left's War on Free Speech and the Legitimacy of Our Institutions." The past few weeks have shown that the Left is launching a full-throated assault on the First Amendment rights of Americans. Last week, Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas announced the creation of the "Disinformation Governance Board" within the Department of Homeland Security. 

On Thursday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk announced that he submitted an offer to acquire Twitter. The Washington Post reported:

Elon Musk has launched a $43 billion hostile takeover bid for Twitter, the social network that the eccentric billionaire behind Tesla uses as a hobby to connect with his 81 million followers — saying he believes the platform is essential to the functioning of democracy.

We previously wrote about how the Pennsylvania School Boards Association is speaking out against Attorney General Merrick Garland kowtowing to the unfounded accusations and demands by the National School Boards Association.  A resulting Department of Justice (DOJ) memorandum raised the specter of parents exercising their First Amendment rights at school board meetings being treated as domestic terrorists. Now, other stated-based school boards have joined Pennsylvania.

At least 11 state school board organizations are distancing themselves from a National School Boards Association letter asking President Joe Biden to take action against parents protesting progressive school policies.  . . .

The letters from the state groups recognize the importance of local boards’ role in educating children, with the Virginia group urging educators and school boards to work together and to listen to parents for the “safety and achievement of all students.”

The Supreme Court reaffirmed strong First Amendment protection against voyeuristic government compulsory disclosure rules last week in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta. While we wrote about this last week, this is an important decision that deserves a second look. The Court ruled that California cannot require non-profit religious, charitable and civic organizations to disclose their donors to the state as a condition of soliciting contributions from Californians. The California requirement was started by then-Attorney General Kamala Harris. The Court’s opinion is a rebuke to the now Vice President.

On Thursday, the United States Supreme Court struck down California's donor disclosure requirement for non-profits in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta. As Ilya Shapiro observed, the Court's decision is a victory for Americans' freedom of association.

Democrat commissioners on the Federal Election Commission (FEC) are showing us just how dangerous it would be if Democrat-backed election bills become law. As Kimberley Strassel explained in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal, Democrat Commissioner Ellen Weintraub is a case study for selective enforcement of FEC regulations.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Brandi Levy who sued her high school district after being punished for posting a profanity-filled rant on Snapchat upon not making the varsity cheerleading team. The New York Times reported:

The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that a Pennsylvania school district had violated the First Amendment by punishing a student for a vulgar social media message sent while she was not on school grounds.