Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.
Go to
www.irs.gov/Form990 for instructions and the latest information.
| (i) Name of supported organization | (ii) EIN | (iii) Type of organization (described on lines 1- 10 above (see instructions)) | (iv) Is the organization listed in your governing document? | (v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions) | (vi) Amount of other support (see instructions) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||||
|
Total |
||||||
Calendar year
(or fiscal year beginning in)
![]() |
(a) 2018 | (b) 2019 | (c) 2020 | (d) 2021 | (e) 2022 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grant.") .. | 9,677,941 | 13,565,017 | 15,761,288 | 36,490,336 | 35,171,838 | 110,666,420 |
| 2 | Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf.... | ||||||
| 3 | The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge.. | ||||||
| 4 | Total. Add lines 1 through 3 | 9,677,941 | 13,565,017 | 15,761,288 | 36,490,336 | 35,171,838 | 110,666,420 |
| 5 | The portion of total contributions by each person (other than a governmental unit or publicly supported organization) included on line 1 that exceeds 2% of the amount shown on line 11, column (f) .. | 2,897,352 | |||||
| 6 | Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4. | 107,769,068 | |||||
Calendar year
(or fiscal year beginning in)
![]() |
(a) 2018 | (b) 2019 | (c) 2020 | (d) 2021 | (e) 2022 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Amounts from line 4.. | 9,677,941 | 13,565,017 | 15,761,288 | 36,490,336 | 35,171,838 | 110,666,420 |
| 8 | Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources... | 388,265 | 275,927 | 238,868 | 494,109 | 818,937 | 2,216,106 |
| 9 | Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on.. | ||||||
| 10 | Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.).. | 3,287 | 2,374 | 7,274 | 5,595 | 521 | 19,051 |
| 11 | Total support. Add lines 7 through 10 | 112,901,577 | |||||
Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in) ![]() |
(a) 2018 | (b) 2019 | (c) 2020 | (d) 2021 | (e) 2022 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") . | ||||||
| 2 | Gross receipts from admissions, merchandise sold or services performed, or facilities furnished in any activity that is related to the organization's tax-exempt purpose | ||||||
| 3 | Gross receipts from activities that are not an unrelated trade or business under section 513 ..... | ||||||
| 4 | Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf... | ||||||
| 5 | The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge | ||||||
| 6 | Total. Add lines 1 through 5 | ||||||
| 7a | Amounts included on lines 1, 2, and 3 received from disqualified persons | ||||||
| b | Amounts included on lines 2 and 3 received from other than disqualified persons that exceed the greater of $5,000 or 1% of the amount on line 13 for the year. | ||||||
| c | Add lines 7a and 7b.. | ||||||
| 8 | Public support. (Subtract line 7c from line 6.) | ||||||
Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in) ![]() |
(a) 2018 | (b) 2019 | (c) 2020 | (d) 2021 | (e) 2022 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | Amounts from line 6... | ||||||
| 10a | Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources.. | ||||||
| b | Unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 taxes) from businesses acquired after June 30, 1975. | ||||||
| c | Add lines 10a and 10b. | ||||||
| 11 | Net income from unrelated business activities not included on line 10b, whether or not the business is regularly carried on. | ||||||
| 12 | Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.) .. | ||||||
| 13 | Total support. (Add lines 9, 10c, 11, and 12.).. | ||||||
| Section A - Adjusted Net Income | (A) Prior Year |
(B) Current Year (optional) |
||||
| 1 | Net short-term capital gain | 1 | ||||
| 2 | Recoveries of prior-year distributions | 2 | ||||
| 3 | Other gross income (see instructions) | 3 | ||||
| 4 | Add lines 1 through 3 | 4 | ||||
| 5 | Depreciation and depletion | 5 | ||||
| 6 | Portion of operating expenses paid or incurred for production or collection of gross income or for management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for production of income (see instructions) | 6 | ||||
| 7 | Other expenses (see instructions) | 7 | ||||
| 8 | Adjusted Net Income (subtract lines 5, 6 and 7 from line 4) | 8 | ||||
| Section B - Minimum Asset Amount | (A) Prior Year |
(B) Current Year (optional) |
||||
| 1 | Aggregate fair market value of all non-exempt-use assets (see instructions for short tax year or assets held for part of year): | 1 | ||||
| a | Average monthly value of securities | 1a | ||||
| b | Average monthly cash balances | 1b | ||||
| c | Fair market value of other non-exempt-use assets | 1c | ||||
| d | Total (add lines 1a, 1b, and 1c) | 1d | ||||
| e |
Discount claimed for blockage or other factors (explain in detail in Part VI): |
|||||
| 2 | Acquisition indebtedness applicable to non-exempt use assets | 2 | ||||
| 3 | Subtract line 2 from line 1d | 3 | ||||
| 4 | Cash deemed held for exempt use. Enter 0.015 of line 3 (for greater amount, see instructions). | 4 | ||||
| 5 | Net value of non-exempt-use assets (subtract line 4 from line 3) | 5 | ||||
| 6 | Multiply line 5 by 0.035 | 6 | ||||
| 7 | Recoveries of prior-year distributions | 7 | ||||
| 8 | Minimum Asset Amount (add line 7 to line 6) | 8 | ||||
| Section C - Distributable Amount | Current Year | |||||
| 1 | Adjusted net income for prior year (from Section A, line 8, Column A) | 1 | ||||
| 2 | Enter 85% of line 1 | 2 | ||||
| 3 | Minimum asset amount for prior year (from Section B, line 8, Column A) | 3 | ||||
| 4 | Enter greater of line 2 or line 3 | 4 | ||||
| 5 | Income tax imposed in prior year | 5 | ||||
| 6 | Distributable Amount. Subtract line 5 from line 4, unless subject to emergency temporary reduction (see instructions) | 6 | ||||
| Section D - Distributions | Current Year | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 Amounts paid to supported organizations to accomplish exempt purposes | 1 | |
|
2
Amounts paid to perform activity that directly furthers exempt purposes of supported organizations, in excess of income from activity |
2 | |
| 3 Administrative expenses paid to accomplish exempt purposes of supported organizations | 3 | |
| 4 Amounts paid to acquire exempt-use assets | 4 | |
| 5 Qualified set-aside amounts (prior IRS approval required - provide details in Part VI) | 5 | |
| 6 Other distributions (describe in Part VI). See instructions | 6 | |
| 7Total annual distributions. Add lines 1 through 6. | 7 | |
|
8
Distributions to attentive supported organizations to which the organization is responsive (provide details in Part VI). See instructions |
8 | |
| 9 Distributable amount for 2022 from Section C, line 6 | 9 | |
| 10 Line 8 amount divided by Line 9 amount | 10 | |
| Section E - Distribution Allocations (see instructions) |
(i) Excess Distributions |
(ii) Underdistributions Pre-2022 |
(iii) Distributable Amount for 2022 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Distributable amount for 2022 from Section C, line 6 | ||||
|
2
Underdistributions, if any, for years prior to 2022 (reasonable cause required-- explain in Part VI).
See instructions. |
||||
| 3 Excess distributions carryover, if any, to 2022: | ||||
| a From 2017....... | ||||
| b From 2018....... | ||||
| c From 2019....... | ||||
| d From 2020....... | ||||
| e From 2021....... | ||||
| fTotal of lines 3a through e | ||||
| g Applied to underdistributions of prior years | ||||
| h Applied to 2022 distributable amount | ||||
|
i
Carryover from 2017 not applied (see instructions) |
||||
| j Remainder. Subtract lines 3g, 3h, and 3i from line 3f. | ||||
| 4Distributions for 2022 from Section D, line 7: | ||||
| $ | ||||
| a Applied to underdistributions of prior years | ||||
| b Applied to 2022 distributable amount | ||||
| c Remainder. Subtract lines 4a and 4b from line 4. | ||||
|
5
Remaining underdistributions for years prior to 2022, if any. Subtract lines 3g and 4a from line 2. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions. |
||||
|
6
Remaining underdistributions for 2022. Subtract lines 3h and 4b from line 1. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions. |
||||
|
7 Excess distributions carryover to 2023. Add lines 3j and 4c. |
||||
| 8 Breakdown of line 7: | ||||
| a Excess from 2018..... | ||||
| b Excess from 2019..... | ||||
| c Excess from 2020..... | ||||
| d Excess from 2021..... | ||||
| e Excess from 2022..... | ||||
| Facts And Circumstances Test |
|---|
| Return Reference | Explanation |
|---|---|
| SCHEDULE A, PART II, LINE 10, EXPLANATION OF OTHER INCOME: | OTHER INCOME - 2018 AMOUNT: $ 3,287. 2019 AMOUNT: $ 2,374. 2020 AMOUNT: $ 7,274. 2021 AMOUNT: $ 5,595. 2022 AMOUNT: $ 521. |
| Software ID: | |
| Software Version: |
Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.
Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for the latest information.
| Return Reference | Explanation |
|---|---|
| FORM 990, PART III, LINE 2 | TO FURTHER FIRE'S EXPANDED MISSION OF DEFENDING EXPRESSIVE RIGHTS FOR ALL AMERICANS AND BUILDING A NEW MOVEMENT FOR FREE SPEECH, WE FOUNDED TWO NEW DEPARTMENTS IN FISCAL YEAR 2022-23: FIRE'S PUBLIC ADVOCACY DEPARTMENT DEFENDS EXPRESSIVE RIGHTS OFF CAMPUS AND ADVOCATES FOR A STRONG CULTURE OF FREE EXPRESSION BY WRITING LETTERS TO INSTITUTIONS TO ADVOCATE FOR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS; RESPONDING TO BREAKING THREATS TO FREE SPEECH; ENGAGING IN PUBLIC COMMENTARY; AND HELPING SHAPE INTERNAL FIRE POLICY ON EMERGING FREE SPEECH ISSUES. FIRE'S ENGAGEMENT AND MOBILIZATION DEPARTMENT PROVIDES OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUPPORTERS TO TAKE DIRECT ACTION IN SERVICE OF FIRE'S MISSION BY DISSEMINATING PETITIONS AND OPEN LETTERS; HELPING EVERYDAY AMERICANS FORM PRO-FREE SPEECH GROUPS; AND ORGANIZING EVENTS AND GATHERINGS. |
| FORM 990, PART III, LINE 3 | FIRE PREVIOUSLY MAINTAINED A K-12 OUTREACH PROGRAM. IN AUGUST 2022, WE ELIMINATED THAT PROGRAM AND NOW FOCUS ON DEFENDING K-12 STUDENTS' RIGHTS AND ADVOCATING ON THEIR BEHALF THROUGH OUR PUBLIC ADVOCACY AND LITIGATION PROGRAMS. WE STILL MAINTAIN EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES FOR K-12 AS PART OF OUR BROADER STUDENT OUTREACH PROGRAM. |
| FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4C | 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, 2022 AND JUNE 30, 2023, FIRE WAS IN ACTIVE LITIGATION IN SIXTEEN CASES FURTHERING FIRE'S MISSION, INCLUDING TWO IN WHICH FIRE WAS REPRESENTED BY OUTSIDE COUNSEL. 1. DIEI V. BOYD, ET AL., CASE NO. 23-5771 (6TH CIR.): FIRE REPRESENTS GRADUATE PHARMACY STUDENT KIMBERLY DIEI IN THIS FIRST AMENDMENT 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." THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY SEEKING TO PROTECT A STUDENT'S OFF-CAMPUS, EXTRAMURAL, AND ONLINE SPEECH AND ESTABLISH CONSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS ON A PUBLIC UNIVERSITY'S DISCRETION TO PUNISH EXPRESSION IT SUBJECTIVELY LABELS "UNPROFESSIONAL." 2. JONES V. MATKIN, ET AL., CASE NO. 4:21-CV-733 (E.D. TEX.): IN THIS FIRST AMENDMENT RETALIATION LAWSUIT AGAINST COLLIN COLLEGE, FIRE REPRESENTED SUZANNE JONES, A FULL-TIME PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION AT COLLIN COLLEGE, WHO WAS TERMINATED FOR CRITICIZING THE UNIVERSITY'S RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, PUBLICLY ADVOCATING FOR UNIONIZATION BY THE FACULTY, AND SIGNING ONTO AN OPEN LETTER SUPPORTING THE REMOVAL OF CONFEDERATE MONUMENTS IN DALLAS. JONES SUED COLLIN COLLEGE PRESIDENT H. NIEL MATKIN AND NOW-RETIRED SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF CAMPUS OPERATIONS TONI JENKINS IN SEPTEMBER 2021. JONES CAME TO FIRE SEEKING NEW REPRESENTATION IN FEBRUARY 2022. ON NOVEMBER 3, 2022, JONES ENTERED INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH COLLIN COLLEGE, REINSTATING HER AS A PROFESSOR FOR TWO YEARS AT A SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER SALARY THAN SHE EARNED BEFORE HER TERMINATION. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERED FIRE'S MISSION BY ENSURING PROFESSORS AT PUBLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ARE ABLE TO COMMENT AS PRIVATE CITIZENS ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC CONCERN WITHOUT RETALIATION. 3. PHILLIPS V. COLLIN COLLEGE, ET AL., CASE NO. 4:22-CV-184 (E.D. TEX.): IN ITS THIRD FIRST AMENDMENT LAWSUIT AGAINST COLLIN COLLEGE, FIRE REPRESENTS MICHAEL PHILLIPS, A PROFESSOR AT COLLIN COLLEGE WHO WAS DISCIPLINED AND THEN TERMINATED BECAUSE HE SPOKE TO A REPORTER FROM THE WASHINGTON POST ABOUT THE HISTORY OF RACISM IN THE DALLAS AREA AND POSTED COMMENTS ON FACEBOOK CONCERNING THE COLLEGE'S HANDLING OF COVID-19 AND ITS COVID GUIDELINES. PHILLIPS SUED COLLIN COLLEGE FOR ITS VIOLATION OF PHILLIPS' FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND SUBSEQUENT RETALIATORY EMPLOYMENT ACTION. AFTER THE DISTRICT COURT DENIED DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS, PHILLIPS MOVED FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON FIVE OF HIS SEVEN CLAIMS AGAINST COLLIN COLLEGE. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY ENSURING PROFESSORS AT PUBLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ARE ABLE TO COMMENT AS PRIVATE CITIZENS ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC CONCERN WITHOUT RETALIATION. 4. FIRE V. TARLETON STATE UNIVERSITY, CASE NO. CV37178 (226TH D.CT. OF ERATH CNTY., TEX.): IN THIS PUBLIC-RECORDS LAWSUIT, FIRE SUED TARLETON STATE UNIVERSITY IN FEBRUARY 2022 AFTER IT FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE TEXAS PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT. FIRE SOUGHT RECORDS RELATING TO A FORMER PROFESSOR WHO DEMANDED THAT A STUDENT PUBLICATION, THE TEXAN NEWS SERVICE, REMOVE SEVERAL ARTICLES IT PUBLISHED IN 2018 OR BE SUED FOR DEFAMATION. THESE ARTICLES DETAILED ALLEGATIONS OF INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR LEVIED AGAINST THE FORMER PROFESSOR. WHEN TARLETON ADMINISTRATORS LEARNED OF THE DEMAND, THEY ORDERED THE STUDENT NEWSPAPER TO REMOVE THE ARTICLES AND LATER STRIPPED THE NEWSPAPER OF ITS EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE. AFTER THE TRIAL COURT GRANTED FIRE'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ORDERING TARLETON TO PRODUCE THE RECORDS, TARLETON MOVED TO RECONSIDER. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHER'S FIRE'S MISSION BY HOLDING PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR VIOLATIONS OF PRESS FREEDOM AND VIGOROUSLY PURSUING RECORDS MADE PUBLIC UNDER STATE OR FEDERAL LAW. 5. REGES V. CAUCE, CASE NO. 2:22-CV-964 (W.D. WASH.): FIRE REPRESENTS STUART REGES, A PROFESSOR AT THE PAUL G. ALLEN SCHOOL OF COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON. REGES DISAGREED WITH THE ALLEN SCHOOL'S RECOMMENDATION TO INCLUDE AN "INDIGENOUS LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATEMENT" IN COURSE SYLLABI. WHEN REGES SUBSTITUTED HIS OWN DISSENTING STATEMENT ON THIS ISSUE OF PUBLIC DEBATE IN HIS OWN SYLLABUS, ADMINISTRATORS PUNISHED HIM BY EDITING THE ONLINE VERSION OF HIS SYLLABUS, CREATING A "SHADOW" SECTION OF HIS CLASS, AND LAUNCHING AN INVESTIGATION INTO HIM UNDER A VAGUE POLICY THAT PROHIBITS "UNACCEPTABLE AND "INAPPROPRIATE" SPEECH. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY STANDING UP FOR FACULTY RIGHTS TO EXPRESS DISSENTING OPINIONS ON CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS AND TO MANAGE THE CONTENTS OF THEIR SYLLABI WITHOUT RETALIATION. 6. FLORES V. BENNETT, CASE NO. 22-16762 (9TH CIR.): CLOVIS COMMUNITY COLLEGE'S YOUNG AMERICANS FOR FREEDOM STUDENT GROUP OBTAINED THE COLLEGE'S PERMISSION TO POST FLYERS CRITICIZING COMMUNIST REGIMES ON INDOOR BULLETIN BOARDS. BUT AFTER RECEIVING A COMPLAINT THAT THE FLYERS' CONTENT MADE PEOPLE UNCOMFORTABLE, CLOVIS PRESIDENT LORI BENNETT ORDERED HER STAFF TO PULL THE FLYERS DOWN. YAF-CLOVIS, REPRESENTED BY FIRE, SUED TO CHALLENGE THE SCHOOL'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL POLICY BANNING FLYERS WITH "INAPPROPRIATE OR OFFENS[IVE] LANGUAGE OR THEMES." ON OCTOBER 14, 2022, THE DISTRICT COURT ENJOINED THE CLOVIS ADMINISTRATORS FROM ENFORCING THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL POSTING POLICY. DEFENDANTS APPEALED. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY PROTECTING STUDENTS' RIGHTS TO FREELY EXPRESS THEIR POLITICAL VIEWPOINTS AT PUBLIC COLLEGES. 7. NOVOA V. DIAZ, CASE NO. 22-13994 (11TH CIR.): FIRE REPRESENTS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA PROFESSOR DR. ADRIANA NOVOA, STUDENT SAM RECHECK, AND STUDENT GROUP USF FIRST AMENDMENT FORUM, IN A LAWSUIT CHALLENGING FLORIDA'S STOP WOKE ACT. THE LAW PROHIBITS "INSTRUCTION" ON EIGHT CONCEPTS RELATED TO "RACE, COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN, OR SEX." ON NOVEMBER 17, 2022, THE DISTRICT COURT HALTED ENFORCEMENT OF KEY PARTS OF THE ACT IN THE STATE'S PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES, DECLARING THE LAW VIOLATES THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF STUDENTS AND FACULTY. AFTER APPEALING THE DECISION TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, FLORIDA ASKED THE COURT TO STAY THE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, WHICH THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT DENIED. THIS LITIGATION FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY STOPPING THE GOVERNMENT FROM IMPOSING IDEOLOGICAL HANDCUFFS ON FACULTY'S RIGHT TO ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND STUDENTS' RIGHT TO RECEIVE INFORMATION. 8. VILLARREAL V. CITY OF LAREDO, CASE NO. 20-40359 (5TH CIR.) FIRE REPRESENTS CITIZEN JOURNALIST PRISCILLA VILLARREAL IN A LAWSUIT AGAINST SEVERAL PUBLIC OFFICIALS FROM LAREDO, TEXAS. VILLARREAL GAINED A LOYAL FOLLOWING ON SOCIAL MEDIA BECAUSE OF HER UNFILTERED REPORTING ON LOCAL MATTERS, INCLUDING POLICE AND GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCT. DESPERATE TO SILENCE HER, LOCAL OFFICIALS DUG UP A STATUTE NEVER USED BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN THE LAW'S 23-YEAR HISTORY TO ARREST PRISCILLA FOR ASKING A POLICE OFFICER TO CONFIRM INFORMATION SHE HAD ALREADY RECEIVED FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED THE LAREDO OFFICERS QUALIFIED IMMUNITY. A FIFTH CIRCUIT PANEL INITIALLY REVERSED AND DENIED THE OFFICERS QUALIFIED IMMUNITY, BUT IN OCTOBER 2022, THE COURT ELECTED TO REHEAR THE CASE EN BANC. IN JANUARY 2023, FIRE ARGUED ON PRISCILLA'S BEHALF AND IS AWAITING THE COURT'S DECISION. THIS LITIGATION FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY CONTRIBUTING TO A WELL-INFORMED PUBLIC, FREE FROM FEAR THAT OFFICIALS WILL ABUSE THE LAWS TO TRY TO SILENCE THEIR CRITICS. |
| FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4C | 9. HALL-RAYFORD V. CITY OF EASTPOINTE, CASE NO. 2:22-CV-12714 (E.D. MICH): WHEN EASTPOINTE CITY RESIDENTS CRITICIZED MAYOR MONIQUE OWENS DURING A CITY COUNCIL MEETING, SHE REFUSED TO LET THEM SPEAK, CLAIMING THEIR WORDS "ASSAULTED" HER. FIRE FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST MAYOR OWENS AND THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE, SEEKING AN INJUNCTION REQUIRING THE MAYOR AND CITY TO ALLOW PEACEFUL CRITICISM AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. ON DECEMBER 7, 2022, THE COURT ENTERED A STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION WHICH BANS MAYOR OWENS FROM SHUTTING DOWN CRITICISM OF HER ACTIONS. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY PROTECTING THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT OF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO VOICE THEIR CONCERNS WITH LOCAL OFFICIALS. 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 THAT REQUIRES ONLINE PLATFORMS TO "RESPOND [TO]," "ADDRESS, AND "HANDLE" PROTECTED SPEECH THAT SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE FINDS "HUMILIATING OR "VILIFYING" TOWARD A GROUP BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, OR OTHER PROTECTED CLASS. ON FEBRUARY 14, 2023, THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND NEW YORK HAS SINCE APPEALED THE DECISION TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY PROTECTING ONLINE SPEECH. 11. GAUGHEN V. DAUPHIN COUNTY, CASE NO. 1:23-CV-77 (M.D. PA.): FIRE REPRESENTED KEVIN GAUGHEN AND DAVE KOCUR, TWO MEMBERS OF THE KEYSTONE PARTY, A NEWLY FORMED POLITICAL PARTY IN PENNSYLVANIA. KEVIN AND DAVE WENT TO FORT HUNTER PARK TO COLLECT SIGNATURES FOR DAVE TO BE ON THE BALLOT WHEN DAUPHIN COUNTY PARK OFFICIALS TOLD THEM THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO ENGAGE IN POLITICAL ACTIVITY IN THE PARK. IN RESPONSE TO A LETTER DEMANDING THE COUNTY RESCIND ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL POLICY, THE COUNTY REFUSED, SO FIRE SUED ON KEVIN AND DAVE'S BEHALF. FOUR MONTHS AFTER FILING SUIT, THE COUNTY SETTLED THE CASE, AGREEING TO A COURT ORDER FOR DAUPHIN COUNTY TO END ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BAN ON POLITICAL SPEECH IN FORT HUNTER PARK AND PAY $91,000 IN DAMAGES AND ATTORNEYS' FEES. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERED FIRE'S MISSION BY PROTECTING POLITICAL SPEECH IN PUBLIC PARKS. 12. GRAY V. CITY OF ALPHARETTA, CASE NO. 1:23-CV-463 (N.D. GA.): FIRE REPRESENTS JEFF GRAY, WHO WAS HANDCUFFED AND DETAINED FOR "PANHANDLING" WHEN HE HELD A "GOD BLESS THE HOMELESS VETS" SIGN OUTSIDE ALPHARETTA CITY HALL TO RAISE AWARENESS OF THE PLIGHT OF HOMELESS VETERANS. WITHIN MINUTES, AN ALPHARETTA POLICE OFFICER TOLD GRAY THAT "PANHANDLING" WAS ILLEGAL IN THE CITY AND ORDERED HIM TO LEAVE. ALTHOUGH GRAY WAS NOT PANHANDLING, THE POLICE ARGUED THAT HIS SIGN WAS, ITSELF, "PANHANDLING." FIRE FILED A LAWSUIT ON GRAY'S BEHALF TO VINDICATE HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND END ALPHARETTA'S BAN ON "PANHANDLING." THIS LITIGATION FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY PROTECTING FREE SPEECH IN PUBLIC AREAS. 13. GRAY V. WRIGHT, CASE NO. 5:23-CV-7 (S.D. GA.): FIRE ALSO REPRESENTS JEFF GRAY IN A SIMILAR LAWSUIT AGAINST OFFICIALS IN BLACKSHEAR, GEORGIA WHERE THE CHIEF OF POLICE CHRIS WRIGHT TOLD GRAY THAT A LOCAL ORDINANCE REQUIRED HIM TO HAVE A PERMIT TO "DEMONSTRATE" TO HOLD HIS "GOD BLESS HOMELESS VETS" SIGN. WHEN GRAY DECLINED TO LEAVE OR END HIS PEACEFUL ADVOCACY, THE OFFICER ISSUED HIM A CITATION, WHICH THE CITY LATER DISMISSED. FIRE SUED IN JANUARY 2023 WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT CLINIC AT THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA SCHOOL OF LAW, AND IN MAY 2023, THE CITY OF BLACKSHEAR SETTLED THE CASE, RESCINDING THE ORDINANCE USED TO CITE GRAY, DONATING $1,791-REPRESENTING THE YEAR THE FIRST AMENDMENT WAS RATIFIED-TO THE NATIONAL COALITION FOR HOMELESS VETERANS, AND AGREEING TO TRAIN ITS POLICE OFFICERS ON FREE SPEECH. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERED FIRE'S MISSION BY PROTECTING FREE SPEECH IN PUBLIC AREAS. |
| FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4C | 14. SPECTRUM WT V. WENDLER, CASE NO. 23-10994 (5TH CIR.): FIRE REPRESENTS SPECTRUM WT, AN LGBTQ+ STUDENT ORGANIZATION AT WEST TEXAS A&M, ALONG WITH ITS STUDENT LEADERS, BARRETT "BEAR" BRIGHT AND LAUREN "LAUR" STOVALL IN A LAWSUIT AGAINST WEST TEXAS A&M'S PRESIDENT, WALTER WENDLER, AND TEXAS A&M SYSTEM OFFICIALS. PRESIDENT WENDLER CANCELED THE STUDENT GROUP'S DRAG SHOW AND DENOUNCED DRAG AS "SLAPSTICK" INTENDED TO "DENIGRATE AND DEMEAN WOMEN." THE PRESIDENT SAID HE WOULDN'T CONDONE SUCH SPEECH, "EVEN WHEN THE LAW OF THE LAND APPEARS TO REQUIRE IT." ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2023, THE DISTRICT COURT DENIED OUR CLIENTS' MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND DISMISSED THE DAMAGES CLAIM AGAINST PRESIDENT WENDLER. WE APPEALED TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERS FIRES MISSION BY FIGHTING FOR FREE EXPRESSION ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES. 15. D.A. V. TRI COUNTY AREA SCHOOLS, CASE NO. 1:23-423 (W.D. MICH.): FIRE REPRESENTS TWO PUBLIC MIDDLE-SCHOOL STUDENTS IN MICHIGAN. SCHOOL OFFICIALS ORDERED THEM TO REMOVE SWEATSHIRTS WITH THE PHRASE "LET'S GO BRANDON," A WELL-KNOWN, NON-PROFANE, ANTI-PRESIDENT BIDEN POLITICAL SLOGAN, WHILE ALLOWING OTHER STUDENTS TO WEAR APPAREL WITH DIFFERENT POLITICAL MESSAGES, INCLUDING GAY-PRIDE-THEMED HOODIES. FIRE'S LAWSUIT SEEKS TO BLOCK THE SCHOOL'S VIEWPOINT-DISCRIMINATORY BAN ON "LET'S GO BRANDON" APPAREL, AS WELL AS ITS DRESS CODE POLICY BANNING STUDENTS FROM WEARING CLOTHING THAT "CALLS UNDUE ATTENTION" TO THE STUDENT. THIS LITIGATION FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY STOPPING SCHOOLS FROM PICKING AND CHOOSING WHICH POLITICAL BELIEFS ARE WORTHY OF EXPRESSION. 16. KERSHNAR V. KOLISON, CASE NO. 1:23-CV-525 (W.D.N.Y.): FIRE REPRESENTS TENURED PHILOSOPHY PROFESSOR DR. STEPHEN KERSHNAR IN A LAWSUIT AGAINST SUNY FREDONIA FILED IN JUNE 2023. IN FEBRUARY 2022, SUNY FREDONIA'S LEADERSHIP SUSPENDED KERSHNAR FROM TEACHING, BANNED HIM FROM CAMPUS, AND PROHIBITED HIM FROM CONTACTING THE "CAMPUS COMMUNITY" OVER WHAT THE UNIVERSITY CALLED "REPREHENSIBLE" VIEWS SHARED ON TWO PHILOSOPHY PODCASTS ABOUT THE PHILOSOPHICAL AND ETHICAL ARGUMENTS CONCERNING SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MINORS AND ADULTS. THIS LAWSUIT FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION BY STOPPING FIRST AMENDMENT RETALIATION AND PRIOR RESTRAINTS ON PROTECTED SPEECH. 17. PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL. V. DEVOS, CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:20-CV-1468 (D.D.C.): SEVENTEEN STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FILED A LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S 2020 TITLE IX REGULATIONS. REPRESENTED BY OUTSIDE COUNSEL, FIRE MOVED TO INTERVENE TO DEFEND THE REGULATIONS AS CONSTITUTIONALLY NECESSARY, AN ARGUMENT THAT THE DEPARTMENT REFUSED TO MAKE. ON JULY 6, 2020, THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED FIRE STATUS AS A DEFENDANT-INTERVENOR. ON MARCH 11, 2021, THE LAWSUIT WAS STAYED PENDING THE ANTICIPATED PROMULGATION OF NEW REGULATIONS. THE CASE IS CURRENTLY HELD IN ABEYANCE UNTIL JANUARY 12, 2024. THIS LITIGATION FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION TO DEFEND FREE SPEECH AND DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS, LONG DENIED TO STUDENTS IN DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES RELATED TO ALLEGATIONS OF CAMPUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT. 18. THE WOMEN'S STUDENT UNION V. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, NO. 22-16016 (9TH CIR.): IN THIS LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S 2020 TITLE IX REGULATIONS, FIRE, REPRESENTED BY OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND JOINED BY INDEPENDENT WOMEN'S LAW CENTER AND SPEECH FIRST, MOVED TO INTERVENE TO DEFEND THE REGULATIONS AS CONSTITUTIONALLY NECESSARY. ON FEBRUARY 16, 2022, THE DISTRICT COURT DISMISSED THE PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LACK OF STANDING, AND THE PLAINTIFFS APPEALED TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, WHICH STAYED THE CASE PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S RULEMAKING PROCESS. SINCE OCTOBER 30, 2022, THE PARTIES HAVE SUBMITTED QUARTERLY JOINT STATUS REPORTS AND WILL CONTINUE UNTIL THE RULEMAKING PROCESS IS COMPLETE. THIS LITIGATION FURTHERS FIRE'S MISSION TO DEFEND FREE SPEECH AND DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS, LONG DENIED TO STUDENTS IN DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES RELATED TO ALLEGATIONS OF CAMPUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT. FROM JULY 1, 2022 TO JUNE 30, 2023, FIRE FILED AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS IN THE FOLLOWING 34 CASES: - FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES V. SAN JOSE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION (9TH CIR.) - BROWN V. LINDER (8TH CIR.) - IN RE: GENDER QUEER; IN RE: A COURT OF MIST & FURY (VA. BEACH CIR. COURT, CIV. DIV.) - PORTER V. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF NC STATE UNIVERSITY (4TH CIR.) - HEIM V. DANIEL (2ND CIR.) - PACIRA BIOSCIENCES, INC. V. AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ANESTHESIOLOGISTS (3D CIR.) - GONZALES V. TREVINO (U.S.) - GILLIAM V. GERREGANO (TENN. CT. OF APPEALS) - NOVAK V. CITY OF PARMA (U.S.) - ZABRISKIE V. ACLU OF MICHIGAN (MICH.) - BAILEY V. ILES (5TH CIR.) - ARKANSAS TIMES LP V. WALDRIP (U.S.) - KEISTER V. BELL (11TH CIR.) - BLACK LIVES MATTER V. BARR (D.C. CIR.) - BARTON V. TEXAS (U.S.) - TGP COMMUNICATIONS V. SELLERS (9TH CIR.) - CERAME V. LAMONT (CONN.) - ROGERS V. SMITH (5TH CIR.) - DOE V. LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO (7TH CIR.) - PRICE V. GARLAND (U.S.) - JACK DANIEL'S PROPERTIES, INC. V. VIP PRODUCTS LLC (U.S.) - UNITED STATES V. HANSEN (U.S.) - COUNTERMAN V. COLORADO (U.S.) - BERGE V. SCHOOL COMMITTEE OF GLOUCESTER (1ST CIR.) - KRASNO V. MNOOKIN (7TH CIR.) - NRA V. VULLO (U.S.) - MOMS FOR LIBERTY V. BREVARD (11TH CIR.) - FRESE V. FORMELLA (U.S.) - HENDERSON V. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF SPRINGFIELD R-12 (8TH CIR.) - MAZO V. WAY (U.S.) - LITTLE V. LLANO COUNTY (5TH CIR.) - NETFLIX V. BABIN (5TH CIR.) - HERNDON V. NETFLIX, INC. (9TH CIR.) - LINDKE V. FREED (U.S.) LAUNCHED IN 2021, FIRE'S FACULTY LEGAL DEFENSE FUND (FLDF) VINDICATES THE EXPRESSIVE AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM RIGHTS OF FACULTY AT PUBLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES. FLDF IS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE "FIRST RESPONDER" LEGAL HELP AT NO COST TO FACULTY MEMBERS WHOSE NEED IS WITHIN THE PROGRAM'S MANDATE. WHETHER FACULTY FACE PUNISHMENT FROM THEIR PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS FOR THEIR INSTRUCTION, SCHOLARSHIP, OR SPEECH ON ISSUES OF PUBLIC CONCERN AS PRIVATE CITIZENS, FIRE'S FLDF STAFF QUICKLY REVIEW CONCERNS AND, WHERE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE, CONNECT FACULTY WITH EXPERIENCED ATTORNEYS NEARBY FOR ASSISTANCE. WHERE THESE REFERRALS ARE MADE, FLDF PAYS THE LAWYERS' FEES FOR INITIAL LEGAL WORK LIKE ADVISING ON POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION OR HELPING RESOLVE DISPUTES WITH THE INSTITUTION OR ADMINISTRATORS. SINCE ITS INCEPTION IN 2021, THE FLDF HAS REFERRED OVER 55 CASES TO FLDF ATTORNEYS AND SECURED 20 VICTORIES. |
| FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION A, LINE 8B | THERE ARE NO COMMITTEES WITH AUTHORITY TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNING BODY. |
| FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 11B | THE FORM 990 IS PREPARED BY AN INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTING FIRM. THEN MANAGEMENT, INCLUDING THE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER AND PRESIDENT AND CEO ALL REVIEW THE FORM 990 IN DETAIL. IN ADDITION, A COMPLETE COPY OF THE FORM 990 AS IT WILL BE FILED IS PROVIDED TO ALL BOARD MEMBERS PRIOR TO ITS FILING WITH THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. |
| FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 12C | 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. |
| FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 15A | 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 2022. |
| FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION C, LINE 19 | 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. |
| Software ID: | |
| Software Version: |