Tag: free speech

GOP lawmaker wants lifelong social media ban for leftists gloating over Charlie Kirk’s death

Louisiana Rep. Clay Higgins has vowed to get those leftist ghouls who’re celebrating Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk’s assassination permanently banned from social media and cancelled from public life.

“I’m going to use Congressional authority and every influence with big tech platforms to mandate immediate ban for life of every post or commenter that belittled the assassination of Charlie Kirk,” he announced in a post published to X on Thursday.

“If they ran their mouth with their smartass hatred celebrating the heinous murder of that beautiful young man who dedicated his whole life to delivering respectful conservative truth into the hearts of liberal enclave universities, armed only with a Bible and a microphone and a Constitution… those profiles must come down,” he added.

Higgins continued by vowing to permanently “cancel” from public life the hooligans and miscreants who’ve been celebrating Kirk’s death.

“So, I’m going to lean forward in this fight, demanding that big tech have zero tolerance for violent political hate content, the user to be banned from ALL PLATFORMS FOREVER,” he wrote.

“I’m also going after their business licenses and permitting, their businesses will be blacklisted aggressively, they should be kicked from every school, and their drivers licenses should be revoked. I’m basically going to cancel with extreme prejudice these evil, sick animals who celebrated Charlie Kirk’s assassination. I’m starting that today. That is all,” he concluded.

Keep reading

The Motive for Nepal’s Revolution

The final straw for the revolution in Nepal was the government’s attempt to stifle free speech by banning social media platforms. These events did not take place because a few kids had their tablets taken away. Extreme government corruption ran rampant for years while the elite lived luxurious lifestyles in spite of the people they ruled over. The Nepalese government attempted to prevent the people from freely voicing their growing discontent, and then, when the people attempted to protest, the government murdered over 20 school-aged children in cold blood.

The media has poorly portrayed the cause of events by calling it the “Gen Z” revolution, sparked by a social media ban, which is entirely misleading, as the culprit was corruption and poverty. One in four citizens lives below the poverty line, with the average Nepali earning $1,400 USD annually. The poorest 20% spend around 67% of their income on food, and, much like most nations, in 2025, the majority is struggling to maintain the cost of living.

Keep reading

Survey Finds ONE IN THREE College Students Think Some Level of Violence is Acceptable to Stop Campus Speech They Don’t Like

One point that has been made repeatedly over the last 48 hours is that Charlie Kirk was assassinated while exercising one of our most basic rights, the right to free speech.

When Kirk visited college campuses, he was not protesting, he was engaging in peaceful, intellectual discussions, question and answer sessions and/or debate with students who participated freely.

So how would anyone think of killing him for doing this? Well, a survey which was released just a day before Kirk was murdered, shows that an astonishing number of college students believe that violence is an acceptable way to stop campus speech they don’t like.

The College Fix reported:

1 in 3 students say some level of violence acceptable to stop campus speech

One in three students believe some level of violence is acceptable to stop a campus speech, according to the results of a large-scale survey released Tuesday by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.

The survey, which questioned more than 68,000 students at 257 colleges and universities nationwide on a variety of free speech topics, asked: “How acceptable would you say it is for students to engage in the following actions to protest a campus speaker? Using violence to stop a campus speech.”

Two percent said “always acceptable,” 13 percent said “sometimes acceptable,” and 19 percent said “rarely acceptable,” or about one-third of those surveyed.

When broken down by political beliefs, 7 percent of students who identified as liberal said it’s “always acceptable” to use violence to shut down speech — while 8 percent of students who identified as conservative did.

“More students than ever think violence and chaos are acceptable alternatives to peaceful protest,” FIRE Chief Research Advisor Sean Stevens said in a news release. “This finding cuts across partisan lines. It is not a liberal or conservative problem — it’s an American problem.”

“Students see speech that they oppose as threatening, and their overblown response contributes to a volatile political climate.”

A majority of students surveyed — 54 percent — also responded it was acceptable to block other students from attending a campus speech: 3 percent said “always acceptable,” 19 percent said “sometimes acceptable,” and 32 percent said “rarely acceptable.”

This is an indictment of our entire system of education. Schools are failing to educate our students about our most basic God-given rights and the respect that they deserve, especially in an education setting.

Keep reading

The House Just Passed a Bill Punishing “Politically Motivated” Boycotts of Israel

In a first step toward a federal law punishing criticism of Israel, the House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a massive defense budget that would bar companies engaged in “politically motivated” boycotts of the country from Pentagon contracts.

The bill would effectively ban contractors boycotting Israel from tapping most federal contract dollars, since more than half of the $755 billion the U.S. government spent on contracts last year flowed through the Defense Department.

The ban, the latest legislative attempt to target the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement against Israel’s human rights violations, or BDS, would still have to pass the Senate. The upper chamber was debating its own version of the budget bill on Thursday that does not include an anti-BDS provision.

Critics predict a court challenge if the anti-boycott provision makes it into law.

“This amendment is really designed to shield Israel from any accountability by penalizing those who protest its violations of Palestinian human rights through boycotts, which should be protected by the First Amendment,” said Hassan El-Tayyab, the legislative director for Middle East policy at the Friends Committee on National Legislation.

Keep reading

Trump administration threatens crackdown on foreigners who ‘make light’ of Charlie Kirk assassination

On X, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau stated that the U.S. will respond to foreign nationals within its borders who express support for or downplay the assassination of Charlie Kirk on social media. 

Specifically, ‘praising, rationalizing, or making light of’ Kirk’s assassination on social media.’

‘In light of yesterday’s horrific assassination of a leading political figure, I want to underscore that foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,’ Landau wrote on X. 

Landau added, ‘I have been disgusted to see some on social media praising, rationalizing, or making light of the event, and have directed our consular officials to undertake appropriate action. Please feel free to bring such comments by foreigners to my attention so that the @StateDept can protect the American people.’ 

Landau responded to a comment asking how people could flag these individuals. He responded saying he will direct consular officials to monitor the comments to his post. 

Landau didn’t specify which groups fall under the term ‘foreigners,’ nor did he detail what form the response might take—such as visa denials or deportation.

Other activists and outspoken conservative commentators commented on the X post, showing receipts of people calling for their own assassinations, expressing fear.

In light of Kirk’s traumatic death, Vice President JD Vance will visit Salt Lake City, Utah, to offer condolences to the family of Charlie Kirk. The Second Lady will reportedly also join him on this trip. 

This marks a change from his original plan to travel to New York City to commemorate the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, according to an administration official familiar with his schedule. 

Some public officials and leaders are also cancelling their events, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who was supposed to have an event in North Carolina this weekend. 

The president also honoring Kirk this morning, bestowing the Presidential Medal of Freedom to the owner of Turning-Point USA, speaking at the Pentagon. The day for the award ceremony has not been announced yet. 

At the event, the president, sounding choked-up and solemn, said he is still shocked by the horror of his assassination, all the while highlighting his influence on the conservative political landscape.

The President has ordered all American flags to be lowered to half-staff until Sunday evening at 6pm EST in honor of Kirk.

The conservative commentator, 31, was hit by a single bullet while speaking to a crowd at the public university in Orem at lunchtime on Wednesday after speaking for about 20 minutes.

The father-of-two, known for his fierce MAGA views and combative debates with college kids across the country, collapsed immediately after being hit in the neck by a single shot from about 200 yards.

Kirk was answering a question about mass shootings seconds before he was struck. He was rushed to hospital in a critical condition, but was declared dead two-and-half hours later.

The killer is still on the loose with a major manhunt by the FBI and Utah police underway.

Speaker Mike Johnson held a moment of silence for Kirk on the chamber floor as questions circulated about whether the father of two was alive. 

Daily Mail reached out to the State Department on this story. 

A State Department Spokesperson tells Daily Mail, ‘This Administration does not believe that the United States should grant visas to persons whose presences in our country does not align with U.S. national security interests.’ 

Keep reading

Isabella Cêpa Wins Landmark Free Speech Case After Brazil Sought 25-Year Sentence for “Misgendering”

Isabella Cêpa, a Brazilian feminist and outspoken women’s rights advocate, has defeated a legal campaign that once threatened her with up to 25 years in prison.

Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court issued a final, non-appealable ruling in her favor, concluding a high-profile case that began with a brief social media video and evolved into one of the most significant free speech battles in Brazil’s modern history.

After years of legal pressure and public silence from Brazilian institutions, Cêpa has not only escaped prosecution but has been granted full refugee protections in Europe.

The move marks the first time a Brazilian citizen has received asylum abroad for being persecuted over gender-critical beliefs. Her case has now become a legal precedent, one that free speech advocates say could help protect others facing similar repression.

Keep reading

Third of US students say violence is acceptable response to speech

Over a third of US students believe it is acceptable to use violence to stop a speech on campus, according to a new survey.

The Foundation of Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has published its 2026 College Free Speech Rankings, an annual review of American universities’ speech protections and climate of open inquiry. When asked whether using violence to stop a public speaker on campus is acceptable, only 66% of students responded that the tactic is “never acceptable”. Meanwhile, 15% responded that violence is always or sometimes acceptable, with a further 19% saying that it was “rarely acceptable”. The combined 34% is a record figure.

FIRE’s rankings have been running since 2020, and this year’s instalment arrives off the back of continued protests on national campuses over the war in Gaza, as well as the Trump administration’s attempts to withhold funding from institutions whose speech policies are perceived as illiberal. Earlier this month, a federal court ruled that funding cuts imposed by the administration on Harvard violated the university’s rights. In July, Columbia University paid the White House a $200 million settlement having been accused of failing to prevent antisemitism on campus.

The 34% of students who at least occasionally defend the use of violence to interrupt a speech is an increase from the 32% who said the same last year. In 2022, that figure was 20%. There are also record numbers of students who think it is acceptable to shout down speakers (71%) and to block other students from attending a speech (54%).

Keep reading

Critical Update: Evangelical Leaders Raided and Jailed in South Korea Like in Mao’s China

South Korea Escalates Crackdown on Evangelical Leaders: From Billy Kim to Son Hyun-bo

SEOUL — South Korea’s Christian community is reeling from a rapid series of unprecedented state actions that many describe as a coordinated campaign of religious persecution. After prosecutors raided the home and ministry of Reverend Billy Kim — globally known as Billy Graham’s interpreter and longtime evangelical partner — a special prosecutor issued a summons for him. Only days later, authorities jailed Reverend Son Hyun-bo, senior pastor of Busan’s Saegero Church, on charges stemming from pastoral speech and online posts.

These moves come despite repeated warnings from President Donald Trump and his close allies, who have publicly voiced concern over mounting attacks on religious freedom in South Korea. Observers warn that the Lee Jae-myung government’s actions resemble authoritarian tactics designed to silence pro-American and conservative Christian voices.

Keep reading

Here Are Three Ways Americans Can Fight The U.K.’s Orwellian Attempts To Suppress Free Speech

Yesterday, the news came that Graham Linehan was arrested by five police officers the moment he stepped off a plane at Heathrow. Though he’s less well-known in America, Linehan is an Irish comic genius who created two of the most beloved U.K. sitcoms of the last 30 years — Father Ted and The I.T. Crowd. Linehan’s supposed crime is that he has been a persistent online critic of the transgender movement, and his arrest was over three tweets, which you can read here. Nothing about his tweets are debatable as a matter of free speech or incitement. In a sane society, they would all be protected.

For a while now, people have been screaming that the U.K. has transformed itself into an Orwellian police state. The U.K. now arrests as many as 30 people a day for online speech, and like what happened to Linehan, much of what is punished is benign by First Amendment standards.

Yet, the punishments handed down are quite severe, and there are numerous examples of how political U.K. courts operate according two a two-tiered system of justice. One woman got a 31-month sentence for an offensive tweet that was deleted after four hours; the same judge gave a 21-month sentence to someone who participated in a violent mob that tried to kick down the door of a pub looking to possibly attack the people inside.

Still, arresting someone as high profile as Linehan marks a significant escalation. Not because Linehan’s rights deserve more deference than any normal U.K. citizen that’s been arrested for speech, but because the U.K. government is openly inviting the enormous amount of criticism that will come with such a high profile arrest. Just last year, persistent transgender critic J.K. Rowling dared the Scottish police to arrest her under the country’s new and laughably expansive hate crime law. Scottish authorities demurred, not because they couldn’t punish her under the law, but because presumably they realized the blowback that came with arresting one of the most beloved authors of the last century would be too great.

Still, I hope the Linehan arrest shines a harsh spotlight on the U.K.’s increasingly draconian speech laws and leads to much needed reforms — here is a good primer on where the U.K. should start. But for now, the incident should lead those of us in America to act on some inescapable conclusions to help restore freedom of speech in the U.K. and elsewhere.

Keep reading

Starmer’s Regime Just Lit The Fuse On The U.K.’s Free Speech Crisis

Robin Wright, longtime member of the Hollywood glitterati, tells The Times that she feels “liberated” in fleeing the United States for the “freedom” of England. 

“America is a s—show,” the leftist House of Cards star told the London publication, declining to fully go into what she believes to be the present state of American politics.  

Wright, who says she’s found Mr. Right after three failed marriages, including her ill-fated union with “Marxist moron” Sean Penn, loves the “freedom of self” she has found in the United Kingdom. 

The Times’ gushing profile was published on Saturday, just two days before five Metropolitan Police officers arrested Irish comedy writer Graham Linehan at London’s Heathrow Airport on charges of expressing an opinion.

Linehan, co-creator of the popular sitcom Father Ted, was returning from the U.S. to the land of “freedom of self” when the speech police grabbed him “on suspicion of inciting violence via his posts on X.” What violence did he incite? The violence of thought, which in no small part has effectively become outlawed in leftist Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Jolly Old England. 

Keep reading