Rodríguez-Cotto v. Pierluisi-Urrutia

Article 5.14(a) of a Puerto Rican law made it a crime to raise a false alarm in relation to the imminent occurrence of a catastrophe in Puerto Rico or spread rumors about non-existent abnormalities during a declared state of emergency or disaster. The legislature then amended the law to make it a crime to disseminate or knowingly publicize false information that endangers public safety or property. Journalists Rodríguez-Cotto and González-Cotto challenged the constitutionality of the law. The district court held that the law was unconstitutional and permanently enjoined its enforcement.

FIRE, along with four other organizations, filed an amicus brief drafted by University of Georgia’s First Amendment Law Clinic led by Clare R. Norins in support of Rodríguez-Cotto. The brief argues that the law, in providing few guidelines for what is considered knowingly false information, is overly broad and gives the government great discretion to punish speech it disagrees with during government-declared emergencies or disasters. During such times of crisis, it is even more important to keep the public informed and hold the government accountable for its actions. Information changes quickly during emergencies, and it is often more crucial to get information out quickly than to thoroughly fact-check. The law as is undermines citizens’ and journalists’ ability to share information by putting them at an undue risk for what they say.

On August 4, 2026, the First Circuit affirmed the injunction.