Foundation for Individual Rights in Education Inc

“There are no committees with authority to act on behalf of the governing body.”

“The director of finance and accounting compiles all the information needed to complete the form 990 which is prepared by an independent accounting firm. Management, including the chief operating officer and president/ceo, review the form in detail. In addition, a complete copy of the form 990 is provided to all board members for review prior to its filing with the internal revenue service.”

“The board of directors will undertake a review of the matter by making all necessary inquiries deemed warranted by the circumstances. An appropriate organizational response shall be determined by disinterested members of the board of directors. The organization reviews business relationships with all vendors annually. Conflicts involving employees are resolved by the president. Conflicts involving the president or board of directors are resolved by the board of directors. Proceedings are documented in a memo or minutes as deemed appropriate by the circumstances. There is a recurring agenda item at the annual board meeting to ask for any potential conflicts.”

“The compensation committee of the board of directors conducts a compensation study and uses other comparative data as well as an independent review to determine appropriate compensation of the president and ceo. The compensation committee reports findings to the board of directors. The board of directors approves the compensation package. The deliberation and final decision are documented timely as part of the committee and board minutes. The process described here was last completed in 2023.”

“The conflict of interest policy is made available to the public upon request. The financial statements are available on the website. The governing documents are not made available for public inspection.”

“In addition to direct litigation, fire participates as amicus curiae in strategically chosen cases to support critical legal arguments and advance important precedent. Finally, the litigation project works to position fire as a thought leader in first amendment jurisprudence by publishing opinion pieces and legal scholarship, teaching continuing legal education courses, and recruiting like-minded attorneys for our legal network and faculty legal defense fund. Between july 1, 2023 and june 30, 2024, fire was in active litigation in 26 cases, furthering its mission. 1. Diei v. Boyd, et al., case no. 23-5771 (6th cir.): fire represents former graduate pharmacy student kimberly diei in this lawsuit against the university of tennessee health science center and its administrators. Diei was investigated twice by her program's "professional conduct committee" because of allegations that her personal social media activity was too "crude," "vulgar, and "sexual." after the district court dismissed the case on the pleadings, diei appealed to the u.s. Court of appeals for the sixth circuit. This lawsuit furthers fire's mission by seeking to (a) protect a student's off-campus, extramural, and online speech and (b) establish constitutional constraints on a public university's discretion to punish expression it subjectively deems "unprofessional." 2. Phillips v. Collin college, et al., case no. 4:22-cv-184 (e.d.tex.): in its third lawsuit against collin college, fire represented history professor michael phillips after the college terminated him for criticizing the administration's covid-19 safety measures and for other protected speech. Phillips successfully defeated the college's motions to dismiss and summary judgment, forcing the college to defend its actions at trial. Ultimately, the jury found in favor of the college, concluding that, although phillips was terminated because of speech protected by the first amendment, he would have been terminated anyway. This lawsuit furthered fire's mission by defending the right of public college faculty to comment as private citizens on matters of public concern without retaliation and by showing administrators nationwide that fire will represent professors through trial to vindicate their rights. 3. Fire v. Tarleton state university, case no. 11-23-00232 (court of appeals, 15th ct. App., tex.): in february 2022, fire sued tarleton state university for failing to disclose public records under the texas public information act. Fire sought information about a former professor who threatened to sue the student newspaper, texan news service, for defamation after it accurately reported on allegations of his inappropriate conduct toward female students. Tarleton pressured the student newspaper to take down the articles or risk losing funding, then took over the paper, which previously had been editorially independent. The trial court ordered tarleton to produce the records and awarded fire its costs and fees. After tarleton moved to reconsider, the court upheld its order to disclose the records but reversed its grant of costs and fees. The case is now awaiting a decision on appeal. This lawsuit furthers fire's mission by holding public institutions accountable for their violations of press freedom and by vigorously pursuing the disclosure of records made public under state or federal law. 4. Reges v. Cauce, case no. 0:24-cv-03518 (9th cir.): fire represents computer science professor stuart reges, who faces potential termination for including on his syllabus a satirical critique of the "indigenous land acknowledgement statement" the university of washington encourages faculty to include on their syllabi. University administrators punished reges for his protected speech by censoring the online version of his syllabus, creating a competing section of his class, and investigating him for more than two years under a vague policy that prohibits "unacceptable and "inappropriate" speech. After the district court”

“9. Hall-rayford v. City of eastpointe, case no. 2:22-cv-12714 (e.d. Mich): fire represented four citizens of eastpointe, michigan seeking a court order requiring the mayor and city to allow peaceful criticism at city council meetings. During the public-comment period of city council meetings, former mayor monique owens repeatedly shouted down these constituents after they criticized her. In april 2024, the city settled the lawsuit by: (1) entering into a consent decree prohibiting the city from enforcing its unconstitutional ban on public comments "directed at" an elected official and requiring it to allow members of the public to criticize its elected officials; (2) passing a formal resolution apologizing to the plaintiffs and establishing sept. 6 as an annual "first amendment day" in eastpointe; and (3) paying each plaintiff $17,910 (a nod to the year the first amendment was ratified), plus attorneys' fees, for a total of $83,000. This lawsuit furthered fire's mission by protecting the first amendment right of members of the public to criticize local officials, including during the public-comment period of city council meetings. 10. Volokh v. James, case no. 23-356 (2d cir.): fire represents eugene volokh and online platforms rumble and locals in a federal challenge to a new york law targeting so-called "hate speech" by requiring online platforms to respond to or address speech that someone, somewhere, finds "humiliating or "vilifying" toward a group based on race, color, religion, or other protected class. After the district court granted a preliminary injunction, the u.s. Court of appeals for the second circuit heard oral argument in february 2024. The case now is awaiting a decision on appeal after the parties submitted supplemental briefing. This lawsuit furthers fire's mission by protecting online speech from government interference and holding the line against government regulation of "hate speech," which is protected by the first amendment. 11. O.j. V. Chappaqua center school dist., case no. 7:2024-cv-02830 (s.d.n.y.): fire represents a public high school student who was suspended in 2022 after he recorded satirical and sophomoric freestyle rap lyrics at a friends' house. Unknown to him, his friend combined his lyrics which included homophobic slurs with another teen, and posted the recording on soundcloud. School administrators, who learned of the recording through anonymous complaints, deemed the lyrics to be "hate speech" even though the plaintiff is a member of the lgbtq community. This lawsuit furthers fire's mission to protect the right of public high school students to express themselves online, on their own time, outside of school especially where their artistic expression is unrelated to and does not disrupt school. 12. D.a. V. Tri county area schools, case no. 1:23-423 (w.d. Mich.): fire represents two middle-school students in michigan in a lawsuit challenging their public school's viewpoint-discriminatory ban on "let's go brandon" apparel and its dress code that bans clothing "call[ing] undue attention" to the student. School officials ordered the students to remove sweatshirts with the phrase "let's go brandon," a well-known, non-profane, anti-president biden slogan, while allowing other students to wear apparel with different political messages, including gay-pride-themed hoodies. This litigation furthers fire's mission to protect student speech in k-12, especially core political speech, and prevent schools from engaging in viewpoint discrimination. 13. I.p. V. Tullahoma city schools, case no. 4:23-cv-26 (e.d. Tenn.): fire represents a student challenging his suspension for images he posted on his personal instagram mocking his high school principal. Although the posts did not disrupt school, principal jason quick and assistant principal crutchfield slapped the student with a three-day, out-of-school suspension, relying on the school's social media policies, including one prohibiting students from posts”

“17. Palsgaard v. Christian, case 1:23-cv-01228-sab (e.d. Cal.): fire represents six tenured professors in this first amendment challenge to california community college's diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (deia) regulations, which require all community college professors to incorporate the state's views on deia into their teaching. This case furthers fire's mission by protecting the first amendment rights of public university faculty, including the right to not be compelled to speak. 18. Dubash v. City of houston, et al., case 4:23-cv-03556 (s.d. Tex.): fire and the university of texas's law and religion clinic represent animal-rights advocates, daraius dubash and faraz harsini, who peacefully show documentary footage of industrial animal practices on hand-held screens to passersby in discovery green park. Three times, houston officials and the group that runs the public park kicked dubash and harsini out of the park, despite allowing other groups to demonstrate in discovery green over recent years. On the fourth time, houston police handcuffed and arrested dubash because they and park staff found the documentary footage "offensive." this case furthers fire's mission by protecting the first amendment right of citizens to peacefully protest and express their political opinions in a public park. 19. Vinson v. Clark, et al., case 2:22-cv-00020-cr (d. Vt.): fire and the aclu of vermont represents isabel vinson in this constitutional challenge to a vermont law that criminalizes "disturbing the peace by use of telephone or other electronic communication." vinson was criminally cited under this law for her facebook comments opposing a local businessman's "all lives matter" post. Vinson moved for summary judgment, asking the court to stop vermont from using the unconstitutionally overbroad and vague law to target protected online communications. This lawsuit furthers fire's mission by protecting the first amendment right of individuals to express their political beliefs and criticize others online. 20. Gibbons v. Phipps, case 2:23-cv-00138 (e.d. Tenn.): fire represents joshua gibbons in this lawsuit against the city of kingsport, its officials, and police officers for arresting him in retaliation for constitutionally protected expression. Gibbons is a frequent critic of the kingsport police department, recording police officers and exposing their misconduct on his youtube channel. After gibbons posted a video showing a police officer speeding in his cruiser, the kingsport police department with the blessing of its senior leadership sent eight, heavily armed officers to arrest him in a pre-dawn raid in october 2022 for alleged speeding, unlawful use of a cell phone while driving, and disorderly conduct. This case furthers fire's mission by protecting americans' first amendment rights to criticize public officials online. 21. Zoulek v. Hass, case 2:24-cv-00031 (d. Utah): fire is partnering with davis, wright tremaine llp to challenge the constitutionality of utah's latest social media age-verification law, which takes effect october 1, 2024. The utah minor protection in social media act requires every social media user to verify their age or else be restricted to a version of social media that essentially makes them and their speech invisible to any user to whom they are not already connected. Plaintiffs are teens who use social media, their parents, adults who escaped abusive homes and use social networks to help young people in similar circumstances, and a nonprofit organization that uses social media to teach teens about environmental science and advocacy. This litigation furthers fire's mission by fighting against laws that seek to regulate and chill the online speech of both adults and minors. 22. Netchoice v. Bonta, case no. 5:22-cv-08861-blf (9th cir.): fire is partnering with davis wright tremaine, llp to challenge the constitutionality of the california age-appropriate design code act. The law requires every onlin”

“24. Gray v. Hemminger, case no. 4:23-cv-00197 (s.d. Ga.): fire represented jeff gray in this second lawsuit challenging his arrest for holding a "god bless the homeless vets" sign outside city hall in port wentworth, georgia. Despite acknowledging that gray was not doing anything unlawful, police told gray that city employees could eject him from a public sidewalk because it was "city property." after gray declined to identify himself and began filming the encounter, police arrested him. In november 2023, port wentworth issued a formal apology to gray, agreed to train its officers on first amendment rights, and made three payments of $1,791 representing the year the first amendment was ratified to the national coalition for homeless veterans, gray, and fire. The city also issued a public statement recognizing that the area in front of its city hall is a public forum, helping to ensure that nobody will be banned from that space for protected speech in the future. This case furthered fire's mission by protecting the right to speak in public areas, the right to engage in anonymous expression, and the right to record police officers. 25. Gray v. Wright, case no. 5:23-cv-7 (s.d. Ga.): fire also represented jeff gray in a third lawsuit against officials in blackshear, georgia, where the chief of police told gray that a local ordinance prohibited him from "demonstrating" with his "god bless homeless vets" sign without a permit. When gray declined to leave, the officer issued him a citation, which the city later dismissed. Fire and the first amendment clinic at the university of georgia school of law sued to have the application of the ordinance declared unconstitutional. In may 2023, the city of blackshear settled the case. The city rescinded the ordinance used to cite gray, agreed to train its police officers on the first amendment, and donated $1,791 representing the year the first amendment was ratified to the national coalition for homeless veterans. This lawsuit furthered fire's mission by protecting the right to speak in public areas without requiring a government permission slip. 26. Adams v. Gulley, no. Cch-24-587004 (s.f. Super. Ct.): fire is defending pennsylvania resident amy gulley against a civil-harassment restraining order and strategic lawsuit against public participation brought by a british expat living in california to suppress gulley's public criticism of her efforts to intervene in a famous trial of a british nurse found guilty of committing infanticide. Fire is challenging the civil-harassment restraining order as a prior restraint. This case furthers fire's mission by defending against slapps and seeking to curb the use of restraining orders to silence criticism. From july 1, 2023 to june 30, 2024, fire participated as amicus curiae in the following 33 cases: 1. Lindke v. Freed (scotus merits) - 6/30/23 2. Center for medical progress v. Planned parenthood federation of america (scotus cert) - 7/3/23 3. Henderson v. Texas (scotus cert) - 7/14/23 4. In re brown (state bar of california hearing department) - 7/28/23 5. Taylor v. Leblanc (5th cir.) - 8/8/23 6. O'connor-ratcliff v. Garnier (scotus merits) - 8/15/23 7. Vidal v. Elster (scotus merits) - 9/12/23 8. Damiano v. Grants pass school district no. 7 (9th cir.) - 9/13/23 9. Peta v. Tabak (d.c. Cir.) - 9/15/23 10. Speech first v. Sands (scotus cert) - 9/18/23 11. Thomas v. Leagle (c.d. Cal.) - 9/21/23 12. Free speech coalition v. Colmenero (5th cir.) - 9/26/23 13. L.m. V. Town of middleborough (1st cir.) - 10/2/23 14. Parents defending education v. Olentangy local school district board of education (6th cir.) - 10/2/23 15. Porter v. Board of trustees of north carolina state univ. (scotus cert) - 11/6/23 16. Deray mckesson v. John doe (scotus cert) - 11/6/23 17. Tawwater v. Rowan cmty. College (n.j. Supreme ct.) - 11/17/23 18. Book people, inc. V. Wong (5th cir.) - 11/17/23 19. Netchoice v. Paxton and moody v. Netchoice (scotus merits) - 12/6/23 20. Gonzalez v.”

“Gain on disposal of lease related asset 170,998.”