ACLU Commends FCC Decision to Begin to Reinstate Net Neutrality Regulations

BOSTON – Rümeysa Öztürk, a PhD student at Tufts University, was grabbed, arrested, and detained in Somerville, Massachusetts by plainclothes federal agents this week in apparent retaliation for a Tufts Daily op-ed she co-authored last year. Ms. Öztürk is a former Fulbright scholar who came to the United States on a student visa. Early this morning, her legal team — now including the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and CLEAR, alongside attorney Mahsa Khanbabai — filed an amended habeas petition and complaint with the federal court in the District of Massachusetts, challenging her unconstitutional detention by ICE. Attorney Khanbabai represented Ms. Öztürk in emergency filings on Tuesday, resulting in a court order that Ms. Öztürk not be removed from Massachusetts without prior notice. Sometime after that order, ICE officials transferred Ms. Öztürk to Louisiana without notifying the court, her counsel, or Department of Justice counsel. Counsel for the government has stated that he has been informed Ms. Öztürk was detained outside of Massachusetts at the time the original petition was filed, but has not provided evidence of Ms. Öztürk’s location at the time the petition was filed, or suggested that she was not in the custody and control of ICE officials in Massachusetts. For nearly 24 hours, Ms. Öztürk’s friends, family, and counsel could not locate or contact her. When her attorney was finally able to speak with her, they learned that she had suffered an asthma attack while en route to Louisiana. Ms. Öztürk has not been charged with or accused of any crime. When asked about Ms. Öztürk’s case, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed revoking her visa, adding, “we gave you a visa to come and study and get a degree, not to become a social activist that tears up our university campuses.” The new amended petition argues that Ms. Öztürk’s detention violates her constitutional rights, including free speech and due process. It asks the court to order that she be immediately returned to Massachusetts and released from custody. The following are quotes from Ms. Öztürk’s legal team: Mahsa Khanbabai, attorney at Khanbabai Immigration Law: “Rümeysa Öztürk’s experience is shocking, cruel, and unconstitutional. For nearly 24 hours, we could not locate her, and despite a court order to prevent the government from taking her out of Massachusetts, we finally learned the Trump administration had shipped her to Louisiana. Criticizing U.S. foreign policy and human rights violations is neither illegal nor grounds for detention. The government must immediately release Rümeysa to continue her studies and rejoin her community.” Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts: “Rümeysa Öztürk’s unlawful arrest and detention is yet another escalation of this administration’s efforts to silence speech. No person, regardless of their immigration status, can be arrested, detained, or deported as punishment for their political views. Ideas – and certainly op-eds – are not illegal. The First Amendment protects all of us.” Jessie Rossman, legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts: “Grabbing someone off the streets, stripping them of their student visa, and detaining them solely based on political viewpoint is an affront to all of our constitutional rights. We will not stop fighting until Ms. Öztürk is free to return to her loved ones and until we know the government will not abuse immigration law to punish those who speak up for what they believe.” Brian Hauss, senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union: “The footage of Ms. Öztürk’s abduction should send chills down the spine of every American who cares about free speech. The disappearance of students for their political beliefs is the hallmark of dictatorships and has no place in a free society.” Mudassar Toppa, staff attorney at CLEAR, a legal nonprofit and clinic at CUNY School of Law: “What's happening to Rümeysa just because she expressed her sincerely held beliefs in support for Palestinian human rights is unconscionably cruel. No one should have to face the prospect of being stalked, abducted, and shipped off to a detention center a thousand miles away just because they exercised their first amendment rights. We will pursue all legal avenues on her behalf until she’s freed.”

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — On behalf of art organizations, the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Rhode Island argued today that an ideological restriction from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) on grant funding violates the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and the Administrative Procedure Act. In response to an executive order from the Trump administration earlier this year, the NEA imposed a new requirement that forced grant applicants to attest that they would not use funds to promote “gender ideology” and that blocked any projects that the government could perceive as “promoting gender ideology” from being eligible for funding. The ACLU and the ACLU of Rhode Island filed suit in March. In response to the lawsuit, the NEA agreed to drop the certification requirement until the case was decided. It subsequently extended the application deadline to April 7 and temporarily removed the funding block until the agency determines how to implement the executive order by April 30. The government has not disavowed reimposing the exact same eligibility prohibition and any prohibition will retroactively apply to current applicants, who must submit by April 7 and will have no opportunity to alter or amend their applications. “The government is playing games with our clients’ First Amendment rights,” said Vera Eidelman, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “We are in court today to make sure that the NEA can’t pull a bait-and-switch on arts organizations by allowing them to apply free of restrictions, only to disqualify them later. The temporarily suspended rules must be struck down to safeguard artistic expression and First Amendment protections for all.” The basis for the contested NEA requirements is a January 2025 executive order, signed by President Donald Trump, that directs that “[f]ederal funds shall not be used to promote gender ideology.” “We have used NEA funding to provide a safe haven for censored queer artists around the globe since 2019,” said Rose Oser, Producing Director of National Queer Theater. “Losing the right to compete for that funding does not just impact our budgets. It sends a message that trans artists and trans stories do not deserve to be heard. But we will not be silenced. We will not entertain this administration’s aggressive efforts to push trans people out of public life, and we won’t allow them to bend the arts world to fit their narrow definitions of gender.” The ACLU, the ACLU of Rhode Island, David Cole, and Lynette Labinger, cooperating counsel for the ACLU-RI, filed suit earlier this month in the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island on behalf of Rhode Island Latino Arts; National Queer Theater; The Theater Offensive; and the Theater Communications Group. "Rhode Island Latino Arts would like to apply for a grant that could potentially run afoul of the ban on 'promoting gender ideology,' however the NEA defines that nebulous term,” said Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island. “Because the NEA has now declared that they will not let applicants know whether they are going to impose this condition until after the grant application deadline has passed, RILA has been placed in an impossible position in applying for funds. Without a court order clearly barring the NEA's use of this unconstitutional criterion, Rhode Island arts groups — and arts organizations across the country — will be left in an intolerable state of limbo."

GREENVILLE, S.C. – Local library patrons, with help from the American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of South Carolina, are suing officials in South Carolina’s most populous county for systematically purging literature by and about lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people from its public library collection. The lawsuit asks a federal court to permanently block Greenville County’s policies and practices that have deliberately hidden or removed dozens of books that positively portray transgender and gender-nonconforming people. The ACLU and the ACLU of South Carolina filed the lawsuit today in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on behalf of families and residents of Greenville County, arguing that county officials have violated library patrons’ First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. "Books are one of our greatest tools to learn about other peoples, the world around us, and more importantly to learn about ourselves through representation,” said Greg Rogers, a Greenville County parent and plaintiff in the lawsuit. “All children and young adults should have equal access to these tools. Keeping even one child from accessing the representation they provide is a travesty for the equality of all children.” “For years, the library board has tried to censor patrons' access to diverse stories,” said Stephen Shelato, co-founder of Freedom in Libraries Advocacy Group (FLAG), a vibrant local library group that has lobbied hard against anti-LGBTQ discrimination at the Greenville Library. “Local parents believe that exposure to diverse stories is healthy and developmentally appropriate, but board members have repeatedly chosen instead to follow the demands of a loud minority of activists and partisan groups. Local parents are now courageously speaking out and taking action—and they deserve the full support of our community." “Greenville County cannot censor our public libraries merely because its officials find certain materials politically, morally, or religiously objectionable,” said Allen Chaney, Legal Director for the ACLU of South Carolina. “After years of public advocacy against these discriminatory actions, we must now rely on the courts to vindicate a simple truth: the constitution protects everyone, including LGBTQ people.” “Greenville County’s policy is a blatant infringement on the rights we all share to learn, read, and speak as we please,” said Shana Knizhnik, Senior Staff Attorney for the ACLU’s Jon L. Stryker and Slobodan Randjelović LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Decades of First Amendment precedent protects the freedom of readers and community members like our plaintiffs, and nobody’s story is unacceptable simply because of who they are or who they love. Across the country, communities like Greenville are standing up and fighting back against efforts to push LGBTQ people from public life, and we’re hopeful the court will see through these discriminatory acts of censorship.” New policies adopted by the Greenville County Library Board in 2024 require that all materials with “illustrations, themes, or story lines [that] affirm, portray, or discuss changing the appearance of a minor’s gender in ways inconsistent with the minor’s biological sex” or with “illustrations, themes, or storylines that celebrate, portray, or affirm gender transitioning” must be removed from the juvenile and young adult sections of the library. The library system has moved these books to adults-only sections of the library, limiting access for young readers. Meanwhile, the library system has completely removed dozens of titles that positively portray LGBTQ people, including in adult sections of the library. As today’s court filing explains, the library system’s leadership has granted more than 50 requests from the Greenville County Republican Women’s Club to remove LGBTQ materials, while disproportionately refusing other patrons’ requests to order new LGBTQ materials. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit identify specific books that have been removed from the Juvenile section. Amber Galea, parent of two children, says her children are interested in books that have been moved out of the Juvenile section, including Hocus and Pocus and the Spell for Home by A.R. Capetta, The Cardboard Kingdom by Chad Sell, Riding Freedom by Pam Muñoz Ryan, and Snapdragon by Kat Leyh. The following are other examples of books that the library has moved out of juvenile and young adult sections: Julián is a Mermaid by Jessica Love (an award-winning children’s picture book about a young boy who wishes to dress up like a mermaid) Ana on the Edge by A.J. Sass (an award-winning book about a 12-year-old nonbinary figure skater) Red: A Crayon’s Story by Michael Hall (a picture book about a blue crayon that was mistakenly labeled as “red”) A list of 59 books that were removed entirely from the Greenville County library system in 2023 is available here. The complaint filed today can be found here. The Greenville County Library Board members who promoted anti-transgender collection policies in 2024 did not try to keep their discriminatory motives a secret. According to those board members’ public comments, library materials condoning gender fluidity are “trash” and the “idea” of “transgenderism” is a “dangerous thing.” As one library board member put it: “[T]he presence of a transgender character in a book … is grounds for relocating it to the adult section.” Meanwhile library board members and officials have ordered Pride Month displays to be taken down, ordered library staff to remove advertising for an LGBTQ book club, and encouraged librarians to use the “weeding” process — meant to remove books that are outdated or in physical disrepair — as a pretext to throw out LGBTQ titles, including books purchased within the past five years. These actions by library board members and library administrators have contributed to an ongoing “culture of fear,” as highlighted in an October 2023 Greenville News article. That cultural shift has led the staff turnover rate to double. For years, local advocates and library employees have shown resilience in the face of these attacks. Greenville County residents have shown up to speak against censorship at Library Board meetings. One library board member resigned in protest in July 2022 after the board chair ordered Pride Month displays to be taken down, and a former library communications director resigned in October 2022 after being pressured to remove a TV slide promoting an LGBTQ book club. Today’s lawsuit seeks to address the practice of viewpoint discrimination in the Greenville County Library System, which reports 1.2 million visits per year across 12 locations. The plaintiffs are asking the court to uphold the freedom to access information, a right derived from the First Amendment. They also ask the court to uphold the Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection under the law for all Greenville County residents. Other South Carolina library systems considering following in the path of Greenville County should take heed.