First, on the ethical side…we have The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which picked up the metaphorical baton on non-partisan defense of freedom of speech after the ACLU threw their mission away and became just another lackey for the Democratic Party.
A federal district court today dismissed with prejudice the lawsuit against Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer stemming from her late and spectacularly wrong poll before the 2024 election showing Donald Trump losing reliably Republican Iowa to Kamala Harris. The lawsuit, brought by a subscriber to The Des Moines Register and structured as a class action asserted claims under Iowa’s Consumer Fraud Act was fraud and attempted election interference. It was a stupid lawsuit, so Selzer, represented pro bono by FIRE, which explained that commentary about a political election, including polls, are protected speech. The court agreed that “polls are a mere snapshot of a dynamic and changing electorate” and “the results of an opinion poll are not an actionable false representation merely because the anticipated results differ from what eventually occurred.” The court also held the plaintiff had “no factual allegations” to support his fraud claim, instead “invok[ing] mere buzzwords and speculation” to support his claims.
[Aside: This is not to say that the poll wasn’t highly suspicious, coming as it did as a hit-and-run strike at Trump by a previously accurate pollster who announced her retirement following the election. I wrote on November 6 last year, “Ann Seltzer, whose polling stunned everyone by showing Harris winning Iowa, a GOP stronghold, needs to go into another field. Trump is winning the state by 14 pts. How incompetent. How embarrassing.”
But absent a smoking gun email surfacing in which Seltzer wrote, “Wait until GOP voters see my new poll! They’ll be so discouraged they’ll stay home on election day and Harris will win! BWAHAHAHAHA!” the lawsuit was an attempt to chill free speech. FIRE stuck to its mission, not to one side of the political spectrum.
On the unethical (and stupid) side…. we have the Sierra Club, which has followed the ACLU into integrity hell. It once fairly pronounced itself as the “largest and most influential grass roots environmental organization in the country.” But it has lost 60% of what was once a four million person membership, and has held three rounds of employee layoffs since 2022 as the result of a $40 million projected budget deficit. Its political giving has also dropped. Why? Because, in a perfect example of “Get woke, go broke,” the Sierra Club decided to add other progressive causes to its activities, including “racial justice,” organized labor rights, LGBTQ rights, open borders, resistance to President Trump (of course) and the rest. The club hired Ben Jealous, formerly head of the NAACP, because nothing says civil rights more than hiking and camping. But Jealous was historic as the club’s first black executive director—a DEI success! He was also a terrible executive director and had to be fired.
The conversion of the Sierra Club into just another Axis member effectively sent Republicans and conservatives who love the Great Outdoors right Out the Door. Morons, and not just morons, but betrayers of their loyal supporters who trusted the organization to stay focused on their narrow but clear and vital mission.
Ethics Alarms 
In the 77 Square Miles Surrounded By A Sea Of Reality, we have one “(o)n the unethical (and stupid) side“
Urban Triage (what’s in a name, am I right?) and their talented CEO Brandi Grayson (knocking down ~$300 large, nearly twice that of the governor) have engaged in some…um…QUESTIONABLE dealings.
But she’s a black X-Chromosomal Unit, which, despite a lengthy rap sheet, makes her ding nigh untouchable in these here parts; any requests for explanation/accountability are met head on with slobbering accusations of racism/sexism.
Even so, local über Lefties Dave Cieslewicz and Greg Humphrey (both…um…chronicled here at EA time-n-again) have called out her nefarious doings.
PWS
I’ve had occasion, professionally, to experience Sierra Club strategies and tactics for quite a while. From my perspective, the Sierra Club has been a left-wing advocacy organization for at least 30 years, and a broad-ranging one at that. Hiking and climbing ceased being a primary focus long ago – except as a cover story.
Agreed. I doubt there have been many conservatives giving to the Sierra Club … maybe ever.
Re: Sierra Club – I consider myself a “conservation conservative”, and once looked into Sierra Club support. When I realized that they were promoting exotic world-traveling tourism (and selling lots of advertising for world-travel tourism companies) while decrying the energy company operations that make that travel possible, I lost interest. Like most other “environmentalist” groups, they’re blind to the contradictions of flying to meetings where they complain about the production of jet fuel. Now, I’m not persuaded that human activities are the major cause of climate change, but have no patience for those who proclaim that it is, and ignore it in their personal conduct.
Chuck
From a NYT article Ann Althouse treats today:
Delia Malone, an ecologist and volunteer for the club’s Colorado chapter, said she heard from attorneys hired by the Sierra Club, seeking to interview her as part of an investigation against her. ‘I said, “What’s the claim, and who made the claim?” And they said, “We can’t tell you that,”‘ Ms. Malone said. Ms. Malone thought that someone else in the chapter had filed a complaint. She recalled an incident when a club staff member had scolded her for saying that the club should lobby Colorado’s legislature for more protections for wolves. ‘One of the staff said, “That’s fine, Delia. But what do wolves have to do with equity, justice and inclusion?”‘ Ms. Malone said….”