Daniel Goodwin, who was placed on probation on Jan. 6, has completed his one-year court-supervised period by censoring his own constitutionally protected speech out of fear of arrest for publishing so-called “false information” that led to federal court-ordered monitoring of his computer and internet communications, his lawyers said.
A federal appeals court initially struck down the “disinformation” surveillance order in February, but a district court reinstated it in June and denied the defendants' emergency motion to block the ruling pending appeal. Since then, federal appeals courts have twice declined to intervene as the case nears deadlines.
“This is law enforcement, not justice,” attorney Carolyn Stewart told The Blaze-News minutes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected her lawsuit.
Motion of August 28 They are seeking an injunction to stop the case.
“This isn't the end of the world as the Department of Justice and law enforcement tyrants in Washington try to crush the First Amendment and jail political opponents for free speech,” Stewart told Blaze News. “If Elon Musk can take on the traitors in Brazil and Washington, we can take on Washington.”
“These conditions are imposed as a punishment and a stifle for holding views that oppose the government.”
September 3
Per curiam order, Circuit Judges Robert Wilkins, Neomi Rao and Gregory Katsas denied the injunction request, finding that Goodwin had “not met his burden” to show why he could not seek relief in district court.
Senior District Judge Reggie Walton, who authored the original and reinstated disinformation monitoring orders, denied all of the defense's motions for reconsideration and to stay the appeal.
The appeals court's review division postponed action on federal prosecutors' motion to dismiss the appeal case because Goodwin is no longer under the court's supervision.
On August 6, the commission denied a defense motion seeking an emergency stay of Judge Walton's monitoring order.
Goodwin was scheduled to be released from court supervision on August 25, but Stewart filed an injunction arguing that Goodwin lost his job due to unconstitutional court monitoring of speech and would now be required to remove the government spyware from his devices or replace them at a cost of $10,000.
The government argues that it never began monitoring disinformation because the appeal was pending.
“Mr. Goodwin mistakenly assumes that computer monitoring was in fact occurring,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth Danello said in a court filing. “Had he filed this motion in district court, the government could have demonstrated on appeal that the probation department never actually installed any monitoring software.”
Daniel Goodwin, left, on Jan. 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol and during a Fourth of July Independence Day celebration.
Photo by Daniel Goodwin
While the government denies that it actually initiated monitoring of Goodwin's devices, his lawyers, in arguing why it needed to monitor him, have presented certain information that the government could have obtained “only by accessing internal website posting data and Mr. Goodwin's computer activity.”
Stewart said the court-ordered restrictions on speech “are implemented without a reasonable suspicion of a crime, even though no computer or internet has been used to commit a crime, and are imposed as a punishment for holding views in opposition to the government and a stifle speech.”
Goodwin's Jan. 6 misdemeanor trespass case has emerged as a harbinger of First Amendment violations, and Stewart said that if left unresolved in an appeals court, it could set an example for the government to jail people who say things it doesn't like.
“It is questionable whether a vague, broad ban on spreading 'disinformation' about January 6th could survive First Amendment scrutiny.”
“If this Court denies the petition, the use of computer restrictions and surveillance as a punishment for protected speech and to suppress the views of not only Judge Walton but other judges in lower courts will spread like a virus,” Stewart wrote. “This is a matter of great public concern, and the issue is not uncontroversial.”
Computer needs to be disinfected
Goodwin said significant and irreparable harm had been caused by the appeals court that first struck down the disinformation monitors and refused to grant a stay of execution while the new appeal was pending.
“Surveillance (espionage) does not require the physical installation of software on-site, so we don't know what was installed remotely or who installed it,” Stewart told Blaze News. “We have the facts to show that surveillance occurred, and yet the government is opposed to transparency. I call it tyranny.”
The unusual case is a battle between Judge Walton and Goodwin, 35, of San Francisco, who was convicted of one misdemeanor for entering the U.S. Capitol for 36 seconds on Jan. 6.
Judge Walton was outraged by Goodwin's appearance on Fox News' “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on March 14, 2023. The judge argued that Goodwin spread “fake news” and “misinformation” about January 6th while on air and downplayed his own role in the protests at the Capitol.
For these reasons, Judge Walton added special conditions to Goodwin's sentence in June 2023, directing the U.S. Probation and Parole Department to monitor the defendant's computer and internet communications for so-called “false information,” but did not define that term, how it applied to January 6, or who would decide what is true and what is false.
Stewart filed a notice of appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on June 30, 2023.
Abstract submitted In September 2023, the Court of Appeals vacated the “disinformation” surveillance order in this case. On February 1, 2024, the Court of Appeals vacated the “disinformation” surveillance order.
The three-judge panel decided that Justice Walton
“Clearly a mistake was made.” The court did not consider whether computer monitoring was “reasonably related to the relevant sentencing factors and did not involve a 'greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary' to achieve the sentencing objectives.”
“Goodwin is likely to prevail on the substantial grounds and has demonstrated immediate and irreparable injury.”
Shortly after the appeals court remanded the case to Judge Walton for further review, she ordered Goodwin to “show cause” why the recently cancelled disinformation monitoring should not be reinstated.
At a “show cause” hearing on June 27, Judge Walton reinstated the monitoring provision, ruled that the objections raised by the Court of Appeals had been satisfied, and denied Stewart's emergency motion to stay enforcement of the order pending appeal.
Judge Katsas dissented from the appeals court's Aug. 6 decision to deny Goodwin probation. The restrictions on Goodwin's speech do not survive judicial review and Goodwin is likely to prevail on appeal, Judge Katsas wrote.
“Mr. Goodwin appealed and moved for a stay of execution. Because in my view Mr. Goodwin is likely to succeed substantially and has demonstrated immediate and irreparable harm, I grant the motion,” Katsas wrote in a two-page dissent.
Katsas wrote in dissent that the First Amendment “significantly limits the government's power to ban false speech,” including defending speech disguised as the use of force or threats, he said.
It wouldn't stand up to scrutiny
“Given the record so far, it is doubtful that a vague, broad ban on the spread of 'fake news' about January 6th could survive First Amendment scrutiny under these standards,” Katsas wrote. “These standards acknowledge that 'language in the political arena … is often malicious, offensive, and inaccurate.'”
Katsas said this legal factor favored Goodwin, despite her argument that she would lose her job as a journalist if the government monitored what she said.
“Given the two most important injunctive claims in Goodwin's favor and the lack of public interest in enforcing potentially unlawful speech restrictions, I grant the injunction,” Katsas wrote.
Do you like Blaze News? Bypass censorship and subscribe to our newsletter to get stories like this delivered directly to your inbox. Sign up here!
