Tag: free speech

Rubio Announces Visa Restrictions on Foreign Nationals Involved in Censoring Americans

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on May 28 new visa restrictions against foreign nationals involved in censoring the speech of U.S. citizens.

“For too long, Americans have been fined, harassed, and even charged by foreign authorities for exercising their free speech rights,” Rubio announced in a post on social media platform X.

“Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans. Free speech is essential to the American way of life—a birthright over which foreign governments have no authority.”

Rubio said foreign nationals involved in suppressing the rights of Americans shouldn’t be allowed to visit the United States.

“Whether in Latin America, Europe, or elsewhere, the days of passive treatment for those who work to undermine the rights of Americans are over,” he said.

Keep reading

Trump Sent A ‘Free Speech Squad’ To The UK To Investigate Erosion Of Rights

President Trump has dispatched a cadre of State Department officials to the UK to monitor and investigate the growing attacks on freedom of speech by the British government.

The Telegraph reports that “A five-person team from the US State Department spent days in the country,” and among a host of other issues they looked into a crack down on pro-life activists voicing, or in many cases silently expressing opposition to abortion clinics.

The report notes that Trump’s free speech squad, specifically from the US Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL), “met with five activists who had been arrested for silently protesting outside abortion clinics across Britain.”

The visit demonstrates that Trump is acutely aware of the threat to freedom that is growing in the UK and is willing to intervene in British affairs as required.

The activists, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, Rose Docherty, Adam Smith-Connor, Livia Tossici-Bolt and Father Sean Gough, a Catholic priest, were all arrested for standing outside abortion clinics on public roads and silently praying.

Keep reading

Inside the Brussels Showdown Over Europe’s Speech Police

On a mild Brussels morning, inside the halls of the European Parliament, a group of politicians, legal scholars, and policy skeptics gathered to talk about a piece of legislation most Europeans haven’t read, but which may soon be quietly reshaping how they speak, share, and think online.

Yesterday’s event, hosted by MEPs Stephen Bartulica and Virginie Joron, with support from ADF International, focused on the increasingly controversial Digital Services Act (DSA), a law initially sold as a digital shield against misinformation and tech giant abuse, but which critics now say has evolved into something more aggressive.

The conference title “The Digital Services Act and Threats to Freedom of Expression” tells you everything you need to know about the mood in the room.

Virginie Joron, a French MEP, opened the event with a direct shot at what she sees as the DSA’s unspoken evolution. “What was sold as the Digital Services Act is increasingly functioning as a Digital Surveillance Act,” she said. Her argument: a law intended to protect rights is now being used by institutions to regulate dissent on platforms like Facebook, Telegram, and X.

Many have previously tried to dismiss this as anti-Brussels paranoia. But even the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labour has flagged the DSA’s “chilling implications” for open debate in Europe.

The devil, as always, lives in the definitions. Who decides what’s “disinformation”? What counts as “hate speech”? How far can governments go in flagging and removing content that someone, somewhere, considers problematic?

Paul Coleman, the Executive Director of ADF International, doesn’t seem particularly reassured by the current answers. “Free speech is again under threat on this continent in a way it hasn’t been since the nightmare of Europe’s authoritarian regimes just a few decades ago,” he told the room.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Overturns Maine’s Censure of Rep. Laurel Libby in Free Speech Ruling Over Trans Athlete Post

The US Supreme Court has stepped in to overturn the Maine legislature’s censure of Republican Representative Laurel Libby, marking a clear win for those opposing legislative punishments aimed at curbing political expression. The 7-2 ruling, issued Tuesday, instructed Maine lawmakers to rescind the sanctions they imposed on Libby over a social media post that identified a transgender high school athlete who had placed first in a girls’ pole vault event.

We obtained a copy of the opinion for you here.

The Court found that Libby’s claim merited immediate relief, stating that her right to be free from censure for speech made in her official capacity was “indisputably clear.” Since February, the censure had effectively stripped Libby of her ability to participate in floor debates or vote on legislative matters unless she apologized, a condition she steadfastly rejected.

Following the ruling, Libby posted a celebratory message on X: “This is a victory not just for my constituents, but for the Constitution itself. The Supreme Court has affirmed what should NEVER have been in question — that no state legislature has the power to silence an elected official simply for speaking truthfully about issues that matter.”

Keep reading

Conservative Surrender: Italy and Switzerland Bow to Islamic Pressure, Ban Free Speech Leader Rasmus Paludan

PAY ATTENTION, AMERICA! If you think being in a conservative-led country or a so-called ‘neutral state’ will protect your right to speak out against radical ideologies, think again.

Human rights activist and Islam critic Rasmus Paludan, a Danish-Swedish politician known for his relentless stance on free speech, has once again become the target of government censorship. This time, it happened in Italy, a country supposedly led by conservatives who claim to champion Western values.

Islam – A Subject You Dare Not Speak About

The shocking truth revealed by these incidents is that Islam has become a subject so sensitive that even non-Muslim countries impose blasphemy-like restrictions to appease violent reactions. Rather than confront the problem—an imported crisis fueled by mass Islamic immigration – these countries are instead targeting the critics. It’s safer, they think, to ban the critic rather than face the backlash. This massive problem could have been prevented and even deported, as promised by the supposedly conservative Giorgia Meloni government, which has fallen woefully short of its commitments.

Italy: Conservative-Led, But Not Safe for Islam Critics

Days ago, Rasmus Paludan was stopped at Milan Malpensa Airport and denied entry into Italy. According to Paludan, he was informed by the prefect of Varese that his presence in the country could provoke anger from others. As a result, he was banned from entering Italy for five years.

“I can’t leave the airport. The prefect has decided that since other people will be angry if I’m in Italy, it’s best if I’m not allowed into the country for five years,” Paludan told RAIR Foundation.

This decision raises troubling questions about the state of free speech and the willingness of conservative governments to bow to potential threats instead of upholding the right to criticize any ideology. Instead of deporting the violent threats, Italy finds it easier to block the critic, revealing a cowardly capitulation to potential violence rather than an enforcement of democratic principles.

Keep reading

JD Vance Warns EU Censorship and Fines Threaten US Free Speech and First Amendment Values

Vice President JD Vance sounded the alarm this week over the growing international push to restrict speech, warning that aggressive censorship trends in Europe could soon clash with American constitutional principles.

Speaking with Glenn Beck, Vance stressed that transatlantic influence runs deep, and the speech policies being advanced in Europe aren’t confined to their borders.

“The kind of social media censorship that we’ve seen in Western Europe, it will and in some ways, it already has made its way to the United States. That was the story of the Biden administration silencing people on social media,” Vance said.

He argued that the US must take a firm stance in defense of First Amendment ideals and not allow foreign pressures to shape domestic policies, particularly in the digital space. “So we’re going to be very protective of American interests when it comes to things like social media regulation. We want to promote free speech. We don’t want our European friends telling social media companies that they have to silence Christians or silence conservatives, and I think there is going to be that friction over the next ten years.”

While emphasizing that diplomatic ties remain intact, Vance acknowledged that serious ideological divisions are emerging. “It’s not that we are not friends, but there’re gonna have some disagreements you didn’t see 10 years ago.”

Vance’s concerns were prompted by a question from Beck regarding troubling developments in countries like Canada and within the EU. The digital censorship framework in Europe has gone well beyond theory, with major tech companies already feeling the brunt of regulatory threats. Firms like X, Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok have faced mounting pressure to fall in line with EU speech codes or suffer severe financial consequences.

The EU has been leveraging the weight of its Digital Services Act (DSA) to pressure American tech companies into stricter content moderation, effectively threatening massive financial penalties if platforms fail to comply with the bloc’s speech regulations.

Keep reading

The Left Ultimately Just Wants To Throw Conservatives In Prison

Did you know that in America you can be criminally charged for using a racial slur? The First Amendment is supposed to protect our freedom of speech (even the use of racial slurs!) and in theory it should prevent such a gross violation of our civil liberties.

But apparently it happens anyway — and it happens because the revolutionary left doesn’t care about free speech. What they care about is power, and if they have enough power they will throw their ideological opponents in prison for the crime of disagreeing with them. 

Consider the case of Lauren Noble, a Yale graduate and the founder and executive director of the Buckley Institute, named for conservative icon William F. Buckley, Jr. Two years ago, Noble was arrested in New Haven, Conn., for allegedly using a racial slur in an argument with a black parking attendant.

The parking attendant, 60-year-old Gerno Allen, claimed that Noble repeatedly called him the N-word during a dispute in July 2023. Allen didn’t file a complaint with the police until February 2024, and Noble was arrested that May and charged at first with disorderly conduct and then three counts of breach of the peace.

Noble maintained her innocence throughout, and the misdemeanor charges against her were dropped last month. The state prosecutor cited “insufficient evidence … inconsistencies in the witness’ statements,” and “video evidence clearly contradicting the complaining witness’ statements.” In other words, Allen made up the entire story.

It’s great that Noble is no longer facing criminal charges, but the fact that she was forced to go through two years of this appalling legal ordeal based on an accusation with no evidence to support it is outrageous.

Even more outrageous is that she was arrested and charged in the first place for allegedly uttering an offensive word. Even if Noble had called Allen the N-word, and there was video evidence of it, that’s not a crime. You’re free to use whatever racial slurs you like, even lazy ones like the N-word. Contrary to what many college students seem to think at places like Yale, there’s no such thing as “hate speech” in America. It might be offensive, but it’s not illegal — at least it’s not supposed to be. 

But this was a just-so narrative that was apparently too good for the left-leaning police and prosecutors in deep-blue New Haven to ignore: a conservative woman who runs an organization promoting intellectual diversity and freedom of speech at Yale, caught using the N-word against a working-class black man. Perfect.

As Noble herself wrote in a recent New York Post op-ed: “The interest in my case seemed to have more to do with what the Buckley Institute represents than anything I ever did, or was accused of doing. Headlines in local newspapers made much of both Buckley and conservatism generally, as left-leaning media outlets welcomed the opportunity to advance the dishonest narrative that everyone on the right is racist.”

That’s really what Noble’s case was about. Concocting a race-based “crime” out of thin air to tarnish the reputation of a conservative activist and ruin her good name.

For the left, conservatives aren’t just wrong or misguided, but evil. They should be silenced. If they can be silenced by jailing them on bogus charges stemming from a made-up story, so be it. Even better if the story exposes them as racist.

Keep reading

KOSA Reintroduced: Child “Safety” Bill Raises Alarms Over Internet Surveillance, Digital ID, and Free Speech Risks

Senators have once again put forward the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), reviving a bill that, if enacted, would radically reshape how Americans experience the internet.

Promoted as a measure to protect children, this latest version now carries the backing of Apple, a tech giant that has publicly endorsed the legislation as a meaningful step toward improving online safety.

But behind the bipartisan sales pitch and industry support lies a framework that risks expanding government control over online content and eroding user privacy through mandated age verification and surveillance infrastructure.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

KOSA is often described as a child protection bill, requiring platforms to limit exposure to content that could contribute to mental health issues such as depression or disordered eating.

What is less emphasized by its sponsors is how the bill empowers the Federal Trade Commission to investigate and sue platforms over speech that’s deemed “harmful” to minors.

Though lawmakers insist the bill does not authorize the censorship of content, it effectively places government pressure on websites to sanitize what users see, or face liability. Such chilling effects rarely need explicit censorship orders to shape outcomes.

Keep reading

Colorado’s Democrat Governor Signs Law That Makes it Illegal to ‘Deadname,’ ‘Misgender’ Transgender People in ‘Certain Places’

Another day, another attack on the First Amendment.

Colorado’s Democrat Governor Jared Polis signed a new bill that makes it a crime to ‘deadname’ or ‘misgender’ transgender people in certain places.

“The bill requires to county clerks and recorders to issue name changes on marriage certificates when requested but leave no indication or mark that the certificate has been modified,” The Denver Post reported.

The Denver Post reported:

Colorado law now explicitly protects transgender people from being “deadnamed” or misgendered in certain places under legislation signed into law Friday by Gov. Jared Polis.

Passed as House Bill 1312, the new law is formally named for Kelly Loving, a transgender woman who died in the 2022 mass shooting at Club Q in Colorado Springs. The law expands the state’s antidiscrimination laws, which apply to settings like workplaces and schools, to include provisions related to using a person’s chosen name and referring to them how they wish.

It also makes it easier for people to change their gender identity on birth certificates and driver’s licenses, and to change their names on marriage licenses.

“The Kelly Loving Act is a beacon of hope to trans people across the country,” Z Williams, whose law firm Bread and Roses supported HB-1312, said Friday. “Our organizing works. Hope is still alive. To be trans is to know how to struggle. We will not stop this work until every trans person is safe and free.”

Keep reading

Gabriel Quadri Appeals to Inter-American Human Rights Commission in Landmark Free Speech Case Against Mexico

Gabriel Quadri’s legal struggle over the right to speak freely about sex and gender has reached the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights after he was punished in Mexico for expressing views that the state deemed politically unacceptable.

Represented by ADF International, the former congressman and presidential hopeful now seeks relief from a regional body, arguing that his conviction for “gender-based political violence” amounted to an assault on basic freedoms.

The controversy stems from a series of posts Quadri made on X in which he condemned the allocation of congressional seats reserved for women to individuals who identify as female but were born male. He also raised broader concerns about the erasure of women’s spaces in sports and politics. These statements triggered legal proceedings that ended in a unanimous ruling by Mexico’s Superior Electoral Tribunal in April 2022.

As part of the sentence, Quadri was ordered to remove the posts, undergo re-education courses, and repeatedly issue a court-written apology on his social media account over a two-week period. He was also placed on a registry branding him a “gender-based political violator,” a label that, according to his legal team, may have damaged his chances in the 2024 election, which he lost.

“I am committed to safeguarding every Mexican’s fundamental right to speak freely. My career has been dedicated to a prosperous and free Mexico for all, which demands that our country abide by its human rights obligations. I look forward to the day when all in Mexico can share their beliefs and opinions without fear of censorship or reprimand,” Quadri stated.

The case underscores growing concerns about how laws supposedly aimed at protecting marginalized groups are being used to silence individuals who dissent from prevailing gender orthodoxy.

“Gabriel Quadri was convicted in 2022 as a ‘political violator’ for stating the obvious fact that a man cannot be a woman. In 2024, he lost his re-election bid. Now, just a few years later, sanity is being restored across the world as the tide turns against gender ideology. Countless public officials at the highest levels are stating the same things that landed Quadri with a guilty verdict. It is egregiously unjust for Quadri to have suffered the ignominy of a conviction, and having his reputation damaged because of his registration as a ‘political violator’, which could have negatively impacted his re-election bid, for simply standing up for the truth,” said Julio Pohl, lead attorney for ADF International.

Keep reading