Foreign governments are building a global censorship-industrial complex to crush freedom of speech online.
Now, they're trying to force social media companies to censor American speech on U.S. soil.
I wrote to @elonmusk to sound the alarm. 🧵
In Europe and elsewhere, foreign governments have imposed draconian censorship on their own people.
But they're also trying to impose it here—wielding their power to force U.S. companies to manipulate algorithms and take down content posted on U.S. soil.
But that's exactly what the EU, UK, Australia, and others are doing.
Under the banner of "online safety" or fighting "hate speech" and "disinformation," these countries have enacted laws like the Digital Services Act and built a global censorship regime backed by powerful NGOs:
For example, when the EU threatened X for hosting a conversation between @realDonaldTrump and @elonmusk, they cited the DSA.
They warned X that "harmful content" and "disinformation" might have "negative effects" in the EU, giving rise to liability:
These laws empower European bureaucrats to target specific posts to censor.
So if you make a satirical joke from the U.S. criticizing Europe's mass migration policies after an "asylum seeker" goes on a stabbing rampage, French authorities might demand X censor your post:
Or if you suggest that immigrants who commit crimes should be deported, German bureaucrats will demand social media companies censor your speech:
Or if you suggest that everyone driving electric vehicles might not be the best environmental or economic idea since sliced bread, Europe's Ministers of Truth will demand social media companies censor you simply because some bureaucrat disagrees with your position:
But they can't efficiently enforce their diktats one post a time, so these laws require the social media to do it for them through algorithmic censorship.
That way, the algorithm censors you automatically—in accordance with their hard-left speech codes—before you ever go viral:
A study recently found that this algorithmic censorship (shadow-banning, throttling posts, deboosting content) didn't just impact so-called "illegal content," but often targeted and censored a much broader swathe of speech—basically, anything that leftist bureaucrats didn't like.
So in France, speech favoring right-wing politicians was commonly censored.
And in Germany, targets of censorship included speech that cast doubt on the far-left's climate agenda.
The study suggested this algorithmic censorship was connected to these countries' laws.
In Germany, the NetzDG law uses several mechanism to incentivize platforms to censor.
As my letter explains, the DSA takes the exact same approach.
That threatens US free speech.
The EU recently fined X for $140 million under the DSA. The EU says it wasn't about speech, but as my letter explains that is a ruse.
Indeed, the fine came as part of the EU's multi-pronged attack on X under the DSA—and we all know this is about X's refusal to censor Americans.
Simply put, we can't allow clowns like these folks to determine what Americans get to see online.
If Europe wants to sacrifice its own liberty on the altar of leftism, that's their choice.
But we won't allow them to export that petty tyranny to the US.
Today, I am chairing a hearing that will expose how Arctic Frost became the backbone of a sweeping lawfare campaign against President Trump and the American Right.
This was coordinated pressure campaign against an entire political movement.
Americans demand accountability. 🧵
The hearing will focus on how Arctic Frost turned into a dragnet reaching President Trump, his lawyers, former officials, Republican organizations, conservative institutions, communications records, and Members of Congress.
That is raw use of unchecked state power.
The Committee will examine new documents showing Jack Smith prosecutors discussing how to obtain information involving Republican Members of Congress.
One message discussed whether they could “get the cloud, not notify, and do the search without consulting the member.”
"The pursuit of this improper investigation is a clear abuse of discretion." Judge Boasberg just got slapped down...again.
The walls are closing in on his crusade to jail Trump officials for DEPORTING Venezualan terrorists.
It's clear: time to impeach Rogue Judge Boasberg. 🧵
To review: last March, Judge Boasberg forced himself onto the "turn the planes around" case—just a few days after trying to foment a constitutional crisis at a Judicial Conference meeting.
He has spent the past year trying to jail prosecutors and cabinet Secretaries.
Today, the D.C. Circuit issued an opinion, once again, in the appeal on Boasberg's attempt (extrajurisdictionally) to hold officials in contempt.
The Court found Boasberg's "inquest" was both wrong on the law and a violation of our Separation of Powers.
Did you know our Judiciary has its own taxpayer-funded “neutral training pipeline"?
Meet the USAID of Article III.
The Federal Judicial Center. What I've uncovered isn't "neutral" judicial training. It's ideological capture. Take a look at how it's infecting our judiciary. 🧵
The Federal Judicial Center (FJC) is the official research and education arm of the federal courts, created by Congress to train and equip our nation's judges.
It shapes how these judges evaluate evidence.
Its materials influence real court cases across the country every day.
You'd assume the FJC is filled with unbiased and impartial legal scholars, especially when it comes to directing judges' continuing education. Let's meet @jrlinkins, Director of Education at FJC.