As the ACLU Recedes From Its Core Mission, FIRE Expands To Fill the Void
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is defending expression on campus and off as the ACLU becomes a progressive advocacy group.
HD DownloadBecause of the social media circus surrounding the Johnny Depp/Amber Heard defamation trial, it was easy to overlook one of the principal—yet least likely—actors in the courtroom drama: the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which ghostwrote and placed the 2018 Washington Post op-ed by Heard about surviving domestic abuse that was the basis of the trial.
It's only the latest example of how the group has in recent years strayed from its original mission of defending speech, no matter how vile. Awash with money after former President Donald Trump was elected, the ACLU transformed into an organization that championed progressive causes, undermining the principled neutrality that helped make it a powerful advocate for the rights of clients ranging from Nazis to socialists.
It questioned the due process rights of college students accused of sexual assault and harassment under Title IX rules. It ran partisan ads against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and for Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, a move that current Executive Director Anthony Romero told The New York Times was a mistake. The ACLU also called for the federal government to forgive $50,000 per borrower in student loans.
As the ACLU recedes from its mission, enter another free speech organization, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, or FIRE. Founded in 1999 to combat speech codes on college campuses, FIRE is expanding to go well beyond the university and changing its name to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. The group has raised $29 million toward a three-year "litigation, opinion research and public education campaign aimed at boosting and solidifying support for free-speech values."
"I think there have been better moments for freedom of speech when it comes to the culture," says FIRE's president, Greg Lukianoff. "When it comes to the law, the law is about as good as it's ever been. But when it comes to the culture, our argument is that it's gotten a lot worse and that we don't have to accept it."
Lukianoff tells Reason that FIRE's new initiatives have been in the works for years, but gained urgency during the COVID lockdowns. "Pretty much from day one, people have been asking us to take our advocacy off campus to an extent nationally," he says. "But 2020 was such a scarily bad year for freedom of speech on campus and off, we decided to accelerate that process." Despite 80 percent of campuses being closed and doing instruction remotely, Lukianoff says that FIRE received 50 percent more requests for help from college students and faculty. He also points to The New York Times' editorial page editor, James Bennet, getting squeezed out after running an article by Sen. Tom Cotton (R–Ark.) and high-profile journalists such as Bari Weiss, Andrew Sullivan, and Matt Yglesias "stepping away from [their publications], saying that the environment was too intolerant."
FIRE is also expanding its efforts beyond legal advocacy and into promoting what Lukianoff calls "the culture of free speech." As Politico reports, it will spend $10 million "in planned national cable and billboard advertising featuring activists on both ends of the political spectrum extolling the virtues of free speech."
He says that people in their 40s and 50s grew up in a country where the culture of free speech was embedded in colloquial sayings and common attitudes. "Things like everyone's entitled to their opinion, which is something you heard all the time when we were kids. It's a free country, to each their own, statements of deep pluralism, like the idea that [you should] walk a mile in a man's shoes," he explains. "All of these things are great principles for taking advantage of pluralism, but they've largely sort of fallen out of usage due to a growing skepticism about freedom of speech, particularly on campus, that's been about 40 years in the making."
Lukianoff has nothing negative to say about the ACLU (in fact, he used to work there) and stresses that FIRE has worked with the organization since "day one" and continues to do so. But unlike the ACLU, FIRE isn't at risk of turning into a progressive advocacy organization, partly because its staff is truly bipartisan.
"This is the first nonprofit I ever worked for where you had people who actually voted for different major-party candidates. When I worked at the ACLU in 1999, people voted for the Democrats or the Green Party," he says, noting that he is himself a liberal. But at FIRE, he continues, "My executive director is a Republican and an evangelical, a fact of which I am extremely proud."
That pluralistic pride extends to the groups funding FIRE, too. He says that critics, especially on Twitter, point to support his organization receives from "conservative and libertarian foundations" as if that invalidates its work. Yes, they give FIRE money, he says. "And you should be very proud of them, because we routinely defend people who hate their guts and we never get any foundation saying that they're taking back our funding."
Lukianoff thinks that despite the rise of cancel culture, most Americans still understand the value of free speech, but they need to be encouraged to stand up for it. FIRE's polling, he says, reveals that "it's really a pretty small minority, particularly pronounced on Twitter, that is anti-free-speech philosophically and thinks that people should shut up and conform."
For that reason, he's upbeat that FIRE will succeed in helping to restore belief in the value and function of free speech. "I think that once you start giving people permission to believe in small d democratic norms again, a lot of people are going to reveal their actual preferences. You know: 'I don't want you to fire Larry for who he voted for or a dumb joke [he] made on Twitter,'" he says. "Part of our job is…reminding younger people about some of these principles because they haven't heard them before. But for most Americans, I think reminding them and giving them permission to believe what most Americans believe…is a reason to be optimistic about it."
This video is based on a longer conversation I had with Lukianoff for The Reason Interview podcast. Listen to that here.
Photo Credits: Tim Evanson, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons; tedeytan, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Ludwig von Mises Institute, via Wikimedia Commons; LvMI, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Stefani Reynolds/CNP / Polaris/Newscom.
Music Credits: "End To End," by Jonny Hughes via Artlist.
Interview by Nick Gillespie. Edited by Regan Taylor.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"This is the first nonprofit I ever worked for where you had people who actually voted for different major-party candidates. When I worked at the ACLU in 1999, people voted for the Democrats or the Green Party," he says, noting that he is himself a liberal. But at FIRE, he continues, "My executive director is a Republican and an evangelical, a fact of which I am extremely proud."
The Reasonistas can't internalize this because they're still ideologically stuck in the early 90's, when the biggest threats to human and civil rights were the Moral Majority whining about porn and explicit lyrics.
That wasn't the Moral Majority on the lyrics thing, it was Tipper Gore.
Jerry Falwell was more focused on homosexuals and abortion issues.
That wasn't the Moral Majority on the lyrics thing, it was Tipper Gore.
Tipper Gore, Susan Baker, Pam Hower, and Sally Nevius, to be exact.
Or, as Jello Biafra put it, "the Bouffant-encrusted Though Police."
I'm earning 85 dollars/h to complete some work on a home computer. I not at all believed that it can be possible but my close friend earning $25k only within four weeks simply doing this top task as well as she has satisfied me to join. Check further details by reaching this link..>> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
I got that bitch to sign her book "How to Raise PG Kids in an X Rated Society" for me. The Gore family is right up there with some of the other worst families on the planet.
That list sounds like a line in a new version of Billy Joel's "we didnt start the fire"
Home income solution to enable everyone to work online and receive weekly payments to bank acct. Earn over $500 every day and get payouts every week straight to account bank. My last month of income was $30,390 and all I do is work up to 4 hours a day on my computer. (res-60) Easy work and steady income are great with this job.
.
More information. >> https://dollarscash12.blogspot.com/
Tipper went on fucking Donohue and ruined my mother's brain
She was fucking Donohue? And she went on doing it? That would probably ruin Donohue's brain.
Because it's not like this article was actually published in Reason...
The ACLU has thoroughly beclowned itself time and time again. Heard's case was great in highlighting that they have become nothing more than a left-wing mouthpiece and activist group.
They have zero clout left when it comes to "liberty"
And the fact that she perjured herself in Britain about having given them $3.5M shows how much even their own side respects them.
greatf
I even have made $30k simply in five weeks clearly working part-time from my loft. (res-32) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was depleted and fortunately I tracked down this top web-based task and with this I am in a situation to get thousands straightforwardly through my home. Everyone can get this best vocation and can acquire dollars
on-line going this interface..> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
It's only the latest example of how the group has in recent years strayed from its original mission of defending speech, no matter how vile.
And... you know, defending the rights of the accused, due process and other things the ACLU has made noise about over the last few decades. If anything, they should have been filing briefs on Depp's behalf defending him from the onslaught of unfounded accusations.
"If anything, they should have been filing briefs on Depp's behalf defending him from the onslaught of unfounded accusations."
Instead of course, the reality could not have been more the opposite. The main reason her claims were amplified and taken without question is because two activist organizations, the ACLU and WaPo, ghost-wrote and published, respectively, her unfounded claims and essentially helped her fabricate this story to twist the dagger for the Me2 movement (their motivation) and further her career (her motivation).
But he's a man!
Like the article says, ACLU is no longer an all-purpose defender of (everyone's) civil liberties, they're "a progressive advocacy group." Think of them like NAACP. NAACP does not "advance" everyone's rights. Rather, it "advances" the rights of black people (at the expense of everyone else). Here's a fine (though by far not the most egregious) example :
https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/03/appeals-court-upholds-gibsons-bakery-massive-verdict-against-oberlin-college/
NAACP was one of the amici curiae arguing for Oberlin College. Did it matter to NAACP that the black "victims" in this case were stealing? Not a bit!
Well, that's ACLU's new modus operandi. Rather than defending everyone's rights, it has selected certain groups it likes -- women, gays, Muslims, illegal aliens, etc. -- and will "defend" them balls to the wall regardless of the merits of any particular case.
Remember - You can't yell ACLU in a crowded theater.
They've been really good. I hope they are able to avoid institutional capture for a few decades at least.
The fact that the director is an evangelical Republican is of no surprise to me.
We're not in the 1990s, your biggest fear is not Jerry Falwell hiding under your bed. The biggest fear is a dour woman with an mandatory anti-racism training guide in a three-ring binder and a human resources badge followed by a group of "clinicians" who are going to tell you the only way for your daughter to be whole is for her to have parts cut off and be chemically castrated, and if you refuse to participate, they will engage your children in extra-familial relationships and negotiations which will be kept secret from you, and you'll be reported to CPS.
Yep. That person is to be feared regardless of their political priors, it just so happens that most institutional capture goes towards one specific set of politics.
Jerry Falwell was never a fear, it was always the progressives and radical feminists. They're the groups that have brought us the dour woman with the mandatory anti-racism training guide. Those groups have hijacked necessary change, weaponized it, and use it to control others.
It's going to be hard; They're already "bipartisan", they'll have to be VERY vigilant to make sure that leftists in the organization don't put a thumb on hiring decisions to gradually shift the org leftwards, and eventually reach the tipping point where they can purge the remaining right-wingers.
It's a common dynamic that happens over and over, unless they explicitly monitor the situation and actively work to remain bipartisan, the left WILL take them over eventually.
The core mission of the ACLU was from the start. and remains to this day running cover for communists.
What has changed is that the hard left now dominates the positions of power so the old rules are no longer needed.
Compare the response to todays blacklists to the repsonse to the old blacklist.
You forgot that today you cannot say "blacklist".
African Americanlist?
Monkeylist.
The people making the blacklists today are still the same people who made them back then. Let's not forget that HUAC was created by under a Democrat-majority House and Senate, with a Democrat chair.
But somehow the tendency to ruin people's lives over suspicions of communism got named after a Republican.
Who was a Democrat until two years before he ran for the U.S. Sente.
And who had plenty of Democratic allies (such as JFK, RFK, and their dad).
Even funnier since said Republican had zero ties to HUAC, being a Senator and all.
>>FIRE isn't at risk of turning into a progressive advocacy organization, partly because its staff is truly bipartisan.
lol everything not specifically Right turns Left in the end.
As Reason recedes from it's core mission the Mises Caucus expands to fill the void.
He says that people in their 40s and 50s grew up in a country where the culture of free speech was embedded in colloquial sayings and common attitudes. "Things like everyone's entitled to their opinion, which is something you heard all the time when we were kids. It's a free country, to each their own, statements of deep pluralism, like the idea that [you should] walk a mile in a man's shoes," he explains.
We used to assume that if someone disagreed with us, they were mistaken, or ill-informed, or held slightly different values. Now people assume they are evil.
Some people are correct in that assumption.
Yeah. The comparison is a bit of an anachronism. Most of the platitudes were a response to polite exchanges; "Do you mind if I smoke?"/"It's a free country." not "The State has a legal right to castrate your kids without your permission."/'To each their own."
nicely put
It's hard to be tolerant and righteous at the same time.
>We used to assume that if someone disagreed with us, they were mistaken, or ill-informed, or held slightly different values. Now people assume they are evil.
Bingo, except some are truly evil now.
They have always been a progressive advocacy group.
The old ACLU defended the rights of actual Nazis to protest in a Jewish neighborhood. There's no way they would do that today.
The Nazis were model progressives, fwiw
The old ACLU defended the right of actual Nazis to protest in a Jewish neighborhood to avoid a precedent that might be used against their ideological allies, but also to keep actual Nazis visible so that they could be associated with the right. The one thing they didn't do was defend their rights out of a concern for their rights.
two sides of the same coin... you cant not be concerned for their rights because those are our rights as well.
They were defending universal rights. Maybe they didnt like the people who were trying to exercise them - that then would serve as a marker for organizational integrity.
Now they defend rights for me and not for thee.
they did that to serve communist interests long term. now you can't stop communists from marching into anyone's neighborhood. it was never about defending nazis
"Awash with money after former President Donald Trump was elected..."
Also, like most left spectrum people, they were awash with TDS. I have no doubt that many people actually lost their minds in November of 2016, and many have still not recovered. And with their panty-twisted hair on fire, the ACLU and many others simply picked their own preferred insane response and went all in. If liberty had somehow permitted Trump to reach the White House, then liberty had to go.
Actually, the blowup in the ACLU happened over the Citizens United decision in 2010. The ACLU had, properly, taken CU's side in that, and their major donors got really pissed off, and threatened to bankrupt them if they didn't conduct a purge.
Which they dutifully did. They replaced their director of litigation with a guy who'd made his name gaming out ways to get that victory overturned!
By the time Trump was elected, the purge was already complete.
The IJ now gets the money I used to send to the ACLU. I guess I need to look into FIRE some more.
CB
He used to work for the ACLU.
“We’ve worked with the ACLU since day one.”
Another leftist advocacy trying to pretend neutrality.
Yawn.
was always a communist outfit taking cases that serve communist interests long term.
Does FIRE distinguish between pledges and donations, asking for a woman named Amber