吃瓜大本营

TALLAHASSEE 鈥� At Tuesday鈥檚 Florida Cabinet meeting, Gov. Ron DeSantis and other state officials followed through on their campaign to designate two leading Muslim civil rights nonprofits as 鈥渄omestic terrorist organizations.鈥� The groups, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and its state chapter, CAIR-Florida, filed a lawsuit challenging the baseless designation in federal court in early July. At a Cabinet meeting in which Gov. DeSantis and four Cabinet members voted on the designation, counsel with the ACLU stood up and asked Gov. DeSantis for an opportunity to speak on behalf of CAIR and CAIR Florida. According to a new emergency rule to implement the Florida law, the Governor and Cabinet have sole discretion to decide whether an organization to be designated can present arguments against designation. Notice and an opportunity to be heard are fundamental due process requirements. Gov. DeSantis did not acknowledge and spoke over the ACLU鈥檚 request, said he heard no objections from the Cabinet, and approved the designation. The entire vote consideration took thirty seconds. On behalf of CAIR and CAIR-Florida, the ACLU, ACLU of Florida, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and Bondurant Mixson & Elmore LLP plan to file an amended complaint and an emergency motion to stop the designations from becoming effective. If the designation does go into effect, the groups will be forced to shut down their operations in the state under threat of severe criminal penalties against them as well as their employees, board members, volunteers, and other stakeholders in Florida. 鈥淎s I wanted to explain before the Cabinet voted to designate our clients, Gov. DeSantis鈥檚 use of Florida鈥檚 dangerous new 鈥渢errorism鈥� designation regime against CAIR and its Florida chapter is baseless and unconstitutional,鈥� said Hina Shamsi, director of ACLU鈥檚 National Security Project. 鈥淭here are simply no legitimate grounds to brand our clients with a reviled label, impose crippling criminal penalties, and force them to shut their doors in Florida. As the country's leading Muslim civil rights group, CAIR is being targeted not because it poses a threat to public safety, but because doing so serves a political agenda at the expense of Floridians' rights. CAIR and all U.S. nonprofits have the right to criticize the government, protect religious freedom, and advocate for the causes they believe in. We look forward to vindicating our clients鈥� rights in court.鈥� If the courts do not intervene, the designation will become effective on November 5.

WASHINGTON 鈥� The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of the District of Columbia (ACLU of D.C.) today filed an amicus brief in support of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico in their lawsuit against the Trump administration over the revocation of their reporters' White House press credentials. The brief filed by the ACLU and ACLU-D.C. warns that retaliation against the press is a tactic that 鈥渂elongs to a society much different and more oppressive than our own.鈥� The brief supports the media companies' claim that the White House violated the First Amendment when it restricted their access to official events because Donald Trump has been unhappy with their coverage. The brief argues that incursions on free expression, left unchecked, frequently lead to greater repression, as demonstrated by American history and the modern experience of other nations. The brief also catalogues the Trump administration鈥檚 alarming campaign of retaliation against dissenting voices. 鈥淚t鈥檚 unconstitutional for the president to ban certain media outlets from the White House because he doesn't like how they report about him," said Arthur Spitzer, senior counsel for the ACLU of D.C. 鈥淭he White House is the people鈥檚 house, not the president鈥檚 private golf club.鈥� On September 18, Trump announced that the outlets鈥� reporters would be banned from the White House, and they were denied entry the next day. On September 21, CNN, MS NOW, and Politico filed a First Amendment challenge to the ban. Two days later, a federal court in the District of Columbia issued a temporary restraining order against the administration. That order lasts 14 days, so the plaintiffs are now filing for a preliminary injunction in their favor. 鈥淭he White House press pool guarantees the public鈥檚 timely access to important information about the president and the executive branch,鈥� said Brian Hauss, deputy director of the ACLU鈥檚 Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. 鈥淚f the president can banish media outlets just because he doesn鈥檛 like their coverage, the American public will hear exclusively from sycophants and stenographers.鈥� This isn't the first time that Trump has barred a media outlet from the White House over his discontent with its coverage. In 2025, the administration banned the Associated Press over its refusal to call the Gulf of Mexico the "Gulf of America." The AP challenged the administration in a case that is ongoing. The ACLU also filed an amicus brief supporting the AP in that lawsuit. CNN et al. v. Trump was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The ACLU's brief is available here.

NIH is targeting and terminating grants for research studies that it thinks will communicate disfavored viewpoints on diversity, gender identity, climate change, and more, violating First Amendment rights and threatening the future of public health.

MEMPHIS 鈥� Today, a federal district court heard arguments in a lawsuit, filed on behalf of four plaintiff residents, to prevent the Memphis Safe Task Force from retaliating against them for exercising their First Amendment right to film the Task Force鈥檚 immigration and law enforcement activity. Plaintiff Hunter Demster has experienced approximately 20 incidents of retaliation for recording, including Task Force agents using their vehicles to swerve at him and box him in, pulling him over for unwarranted traffic stops, staking out his house, and relentlessly photographing and tauntinghim by name. At the end of August, Task Force agents sat outside his home twice and photographed or filmed him and his home. 鈥淭he Memphis Safe Task Force cannot continue punishing me for exercising my First Amendment right to record,鈥� said Hunter Demster, lead plaintiff. 鈥淔or the last year, I have been subjected to a terrifying campaign of retaliation and intimidation simply for observing how the Task Force has overtaken our neighborhoods. But despite what the Task Force may think, every person has the right to hold government officials accountable in every state and every city, including Memphis.鈥� The lawsuit also challenges the Task Force鈥檚 unlawful application of the state鈥檚 鈥淗alo Law,鈥� which criminalizes approaching law enforcement within 25 feet after one warning to back up. Task Force agents have repeatedly used the law to prevent civic observers, including our plaintiffs, from gathering information and recording their public operations. Recently, Task Force agents wrongfully tackled and arrested Mr. Demster, even though he was abiding by the state鈥檚 Halo law and remaining 25-feet away from their activity. Videos of this incident were filed as supplemental materials in court and are available here. Co-plaintiff Melissa Peeler has also experienced the Task Force鈥檚 unlawful tactics. 鈥淥ver the course of this year, I have seen firsthand how the Task Force has tried to intimidate witnesses at a scene, either by boxing us in with their vehicles, taking photos of us, calling us by name, or by attempting to criminalize us by wrongfully using the Halo Law,鈥� said Melissa Peeler, plaintiff. 鈥淏ut I will not allow the Task Force to silence me, my co-plaintiffs, or anyone here in Memphis. We have a First Amendment right to witness and record. We have a right to live without fear of being punished for observing what goes on in our own neighborhoods.鈥� With Task Force abuses upending daily life in Memphis 鈥� a city already rocked by historic and pervasive law enforcement violence 鈥� ordinary Memphians have taken to the streets to observe and record their activities. While observing and recording Task Force activities, civilians have reported a disturbing and pervasive pattern of retaliation. Plaintiffs allege Task Force agents have: Threatened them with arrest; Physically intimidated them, including by swerving at or boxing them in with their vehicles, and making threatening gestures at them, like miming shooting a gun; Tailing, stopping, and questioning them without reasonable suspicion of a crime; Staking out their homes; Shining bright lights at their cameras and faces to obscure recording; Photographing their faces, vehicles, and license plates; and Repeatedly identifying and taunting them by name. 鈥淩ecording publicly visible law enforcement activity is a core First Amendment right,鈥� said Scarlet Kim, senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. 鈥淟ike folks in Minneapolis, Chicago, Los Angeles, and elsewhere across the country, our clients have picked up their phones and cameras to document the massive influx of law enforcement officers into their community. In response, the Memphis Safe Task Force has relentlessly subjected them to intimidation, harassment, and retaliation. We hope the court will order relief against this egregious suppression of First Amendment protected activity.鈥� Since September 2025, thousands of federal, state, and local agents have flooded the streets of Memphis as part of the Memphis Safe Task Force, a 31-agency Task Force that has aggressively patrolled the city at the invitation of Governor Bill Lee. Agents and officers working with the Memphis Safe Task Force have terrorized local communities, conducting mass traffic stops and large-scale immigration arrests. 鈥淚da B. Wells-Barnett once stood in this city and shined a light on wrongs to expose them, even after she herself faced threats for it,鈥� said Zee Scout (she/her), staff attorney at the ACLU of Tennessee. 鈥淥ur four clients are doing similar work today. They are documenting what the Memphis Safe Task Force is doing to Memphians, and in response, agents have threatened them with arrest, swerved vehicles at them, and staked out their homes. That is not a coincidence. It is the latest chapter in a long legacy of trying to silence people who tell the truth about power. Our clients will not be silenced.鈥� The motion for preliminary injunction asks the court to block the Task Force from retaliating against our plaintiffs for documenting their activity and from applying the Halo Law to them. The lawsuit was filed in mid-May by the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, the ACLU Foundation of Tennessee, Selendy Gay PLLC, and BraunHagey & Borden LLP in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. The named defendants include Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and the heads of DHS, ICE, CBP, the U.S. Marshals, and the Tennessee Highway Patrol.