Free Expression Foundation

https://t.co/zlxN0BKmIL The First Amendment protects free expression. But what happens when a federal official retaliates against you for exercising that right? In our new article, we examine Austin Franco’s dismissed civil rights complaint, the troubling gap in legal remedies, and a proposed solution: the Freedom of Expression Act. The stakes reach beyond one case. They concern every American’s ability to speak freely and hold federal officials accountable. Read the full article on our website.

https://freeexpressionfoundation.org/september-2026-complaint-filing-against-accuracy-in-media/ Read the full complaint on our website.

The Free Expression Foundation’s Glen Allen filed a civil complaint against Accuracy in Media (“AIM”) for multiple violations of the District of Columbia’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”) on behalf of Cornell student Austin Franco. Mr. Franco entered the public eye when he politely declined to work with Jewish individuals at the tech startup VrfyID. Amid the public firestorm over Mr. Franco’s stance, AIM sent a fraudulent letter to him purporting to be from an entirely separate non-profit called Justice in the Classroom. The letter offered a wide variety of services including legal representation and grants. In reality, the effort was a farce in order to gain access to Mr. Franco for the purposes of making a secret recording. Mr. Allen sent a demand letter to AIM for five separate violations of D.C.’s CPPA. Following the elapsed deadline to respond, he filed suit in the District of Columbia’s Superior Court on September 7. AIM has 21 days to respond to the complaint after being served.

Government sanctioned black-listing of First Amendment protected speech. Mr. Terrell, who made you the arbiter of what speech is permitted under the law? Your abuse of governmental authority to harass Americans for their rights of free expression is noted, documented, and reported to the DoJ for corrective action. AG Todd Blanche, is this the kind of conduct you approve of in your department? What is the status of Austin Franco's civil rights complaint against Mr. Terrell for this same behavior?

"Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." --William O. Douglas, longest serving justice on the US Supreme Court

https://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/radio-show-hour-1-2026-08-22/ Glen Allen, Founder and Chief Legal Officer of the Free Expression Foundation, joined the Political Cesspool to discuss the arrest of former SPLC officer Heidi Beirich.

https://freeexpressionfoundation.org/victory-in-state-court-in-the-georgia-littering-case/ Read the full update on our website!

Meanwhile, the Georgia state prosecutors, after long delays, finally took initial steps to prosecute the Jacobs in state court on the faux “littering” charges. In late April 2026, Randy Sheppard on behalf of the Jacobs filed and argued a motion to quash the littering charges on the grounds that the political flyers in question were not “litter” as defined under the relevant Georgia statute.  The state court, to its credit, granted the motion. The state court, unlike the federal court, thus clearly and correctly assessed the manifest defects and flagrant constitutional infirmities of the defendants’ bogus prosecution. Fortified by the state court decision, Fred Kelly on behalf of the Jacobs and Mr. Weaver promptly filed a motion to expedite the appeal in the Eleventh Circuit. The aim of the motion, which is pending, is to have the case returned immediately to the federal district court. There the Jacobs and Mr. Weaver will move forward vigorously with their damages claims as well as their claims for injunctive and declaratory relief

UPDATE: In March 2025, the Jacobs and Mr. Weaver, represented by Glen Allen, Randy Sheppard, and Fred Kelly (the “FEF-Affiliated Attorneys”), filed in Georgia federal district court a complaint against (among others) several deputies and employees of the Douglas County, Georgia Sheriff’s Office alleging numerous claims, including First Amendment retaliation. In October 2025, the FEF-Affiliated Attorneys appealed the case to the Eleventh Circuit  Court of Appeals. That appeal has been fully briefed and awaits oral argument or further action by the federal appellate court.

"Freedom of thought and of speech is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom." Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 327 (1937).

"The best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out." Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616, 630 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting).

Huge thank you to the Alex Jones Network for providing a platform to Austin Franco to discuss the ongoing attack on his First Amendment rights and the claims he is pursuing against Accuracy in Media with lawyers in the Free Expression Foundation's ("FEF") network. Due to the generosity of FEF's donors, Austin's attorney can take this case pro bono.

https://freeexpressionfoundation.org/fef-sends-demand-letter-to-accuracy-in-media/ Read the full demand letter with attachments on our website.

Free Expression Foundation lawyers and Austin Franco sent a demand letter to Accuracy in Media for impersonating another non-profit, Justice in the Classroom, in order to gain access to Mr. Franco to make a surreptitious recording. Their actions violated multiple provisions of the District of Columbia’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”). AIM’s letter to Mr. Franco and attendant deception falls afoul of at least five subsections of D.C. Code § 28-3904. AIM triggered Section (b) because it represented itself as an entirely different non-profit offering services. AIM infringed Section (h) because it offered services with no intent to actually provide them to qualified individuals and Section (s) because it passed off its services as those of Justice in the Classroom. The CPPA authorizes treble damages, the recovery of attorney fees, and punitive damages. Mr. Franco alleges $60,700 in damages stemming from five separate violations of the act. AIM has 30 days from to respond.

The Free Expression Foundation is in need of an attorney licensed to practice in Tennessee for an important First Amendment case. You can contact us by DM on X, by email glen@freeexpressionfoundation.org, or our contact form on our website: https://freeexpressionfoundation.org/contact-fef/

Attorneys in the Free Expression Foundation's network are riding the momentum generated by the victory at the state level for the Jacobs "littering" case. FEF lawyers filed a motion to expedite the Jacobses' appeal to pursue 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against the officials who attacked their First Amendment rights. The motion recounts, "Abstention in the face of such manifest bad faith is error, any further prosecution should be enjoined, and Appellants should be permitted to proceed with their amended complaint."

FEF's twitter followership is neck and neck with telegram for the first time! Thank you to everyone who is helping to overcome the algorithm. Follow us if you haven't already ⬇️ https://x.com/FreeExpressFDN

👀

Glen Allen, a lawyer in the Free Expression Foundation's network, sent a demand letter to Accuracy in Media on behalf of Austin Franco for various causes of action related to their impersonation of Justice in the Classroom. Full details to be released soon!

Huge victory for the First Amendment by attorneys in the Free Expression Foundation's network! Judge Brian Fortner granted the general demurrer and motion to quash by defendants Philip and Hilary Jacobs. Georgia brought littering charges against them for distributing flyers the Thought Police didn't like. Granting a general demurrer means that, even if every fact set out in the indictment is true, no crime occurred. The motion to quash invalidates the criminal indictment as legally defective. The Jacobses are pursuing a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim in federal court against the state officials who retaliated against their free expression.