This month, I had the opportunity to testify before the US Congress, bringing attention to something every American should consider: the digital services laws emerging from Europe aren’t just their problem. They represent a framework for censorship that significantly threatens global free speech.
If we don’t pay attention, our First Amendment rights could be compromised not by Washington officials, but by unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels.
As I pointed out to Congress, Europe serves as a cautionary tale on how governments can easily trade freedom for the false promise of safety. Laws disguised as protections against “hate speech” and “disinformation” are increasingly being weaponized to silence dissenting voices, with the Digital Services Act being the most alarming example to date.
This legislation, which passed in 2022 and took full effect last year, is marketed as a means to create a “safer digital space.” Yet, the European Commission, the EU’s executive body, claims the power to dictate what can be said online globally.
The law forces large online platforms and search engines, like Google and YouTube, to remove what they classify as “illegal content.” However, “illegal content” is defined by EU or national laws, which include vague categories like “hate speech” and “disinformation.” These terms can be broadly interpreted, potentially stifling legal and peaceful expression.
Even more concerning, the law empowers so-called “trusted flag bearers”—NGOs, third-party regulators, and private entities—to identify problematic content. Platforms must act swiftly on these reports to avoid hefty penalties, reaching up to 6% of their global revenue or risk suspension. Such financial pressure is likely to result in platforms censoring content preemptively, rather than facing penalties for allowing legal speech.
The key message for Americans is clear: Brussels shouldn’t dictate what you can say. The internet knows no borders, and the implications of the Digital Services Act extend well beyond European confines. Content that is fully legal and protected under the First Amendment could be removed even if distributed outside the EU’s jurisdiction.
It’s true that this law could introduce stricter European standards for content moderation than what we have in the U.S. Companies will likely seek to standardize their moderation practices, aligning them with European expectations. For instance, there was a notable incident where European Commissioner Thierry Breton pressed Elon Musk to comply with the law, suggesting he might block an interview with former President Trump.
X managed to navigate this situation, but the larger implications of what Breton was attempting are alarming.
While the Digital Services Act may be a product of Brussels, its global repercussions are already visible. Proponents argue that censorship is necessary for a “safe” internet. Recently, Breton wrote for the Guardian, attempting to justify the EU’s censorship as a matter of European sovereignty, drawing dubious comparisons to airspace regulations designed to prevent collisions. Yet, the comparison falls short; air regulations don’t seek to silence dissenting views or opinions, unlike this legislation.
Breton may have one thing right: the “Gulf of Misunderstandings” about digital regulations between the U.S. and Europe is quite wide. While Europe tightens its grip on censorship, America appears to stand for the principles of free speech.
Through my testimony, I highlighted experiences from Europe that illustrate how these laws often curb lawful expression.
Americans can’t afford to view digital service regulations as a distant issue. In Europe, stories emerge regularly of individuals being silenced or criminally charged for simply expressing themselves peacefully.
Take the case of Päivi, a long-time member of the Finnish Parliament and a grandmother, who has faced criminal charges for the past six years due to biblical tweets about marriage and sexuality. On October 30th, she will go to the Supreme Court of Finland with legal assistance from my organization for her third trial. She’s been accused under laws relating to “war crimes and crimes against humanity” in her own country, and without checks on this EU Internet Censorship Act, numerous similar baseless prosecutions could follow.
The Trump administration, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, has recognized this threat and mobilized U.S. diplomats to make opposing European digital laws a top priority.
The Digital Services Act is already shaping the digital landscape where Americans operate. It’s urgent for the U.S. to uphold the fight for free speech before censorship becomes a global norm.
Lorcumprice is an Irish barrister and legal counsel. ADF International.
