Subscribe for premier reporting on free speech, privacy, Big Tech, media gatekeepers, and individual liberty online.

ACLU Targets a Whistleblower, Accused of Rejecting Its Free Speech Roots

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

The clearly emerging bias of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) over many years now – although the organization either does, or likes to appear to keep up the appearance of a principled actor by taking on some cases opposed to its political philosophy – has led to it being branded by some as a “former civil liberties group.”

The reason is the decision to wade into a transgenderism controversy, where it concerns children – and in the process, according to reports, try to subpoena a whistleblower.

The whistleblower, Jamie Reed, is critical of medical procedures that allow gender transition of minors. The ACLU was behind the subpoena filed in Missouri, that asked for all communications Reed had with journalist Jesse Singal.

Singal revealed the goings-on in a post on X in early March.

And by “all” – ACLU meant all documents the two parties exchanged regarding “gender-affirming care” provided at or through the Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children’s Hospital.

“Strange evening,” Singal posted, adding that in response he emailed the group by saying (politely) – “WTF, you’re the ACLU.”

Apparently, a lawyer got in touch with Singal next, claiming there was “a mistake.”

You can say that again – free speech enthusiasts might react to all this. But the case is not that simple.

The subpoena has been revised in the meantime – to remove demands that Singal surrenders all her communications with the journalist, and other media outlets.

But the original of the revised subpoena is still available on the Missouri courts website, reports say.

Reed is a former staffer at the Transgender Center whose doubts that proper attention was given to long-term effects of allowing children to undergo gender transition surgery, or use puberty blocking drugs, prompted the state to impose a ban on those medical practices last year.

“Medically appalling,” is how Reed described all this.

ACLU’s involvement here is as a party challenging the Missouri legislation.

But, some observers are particularly struck by this group of all – given its past role as an uncompromising defender of First Amendment rights – now trying to get whistleblowers in trouble.

Once upon a time, the ACLU defended even the Ku Klux Klan and Nazis’ right to free speech. But now the line in the sand seems to be drawn at transgenderism.

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

Read more

Join the pushback against online censorship, cancel culture, and surveillance.

Already a member? Login.