AI regulation looms in the U.S., free speech crises in Europe, confiscated art in Texas, the ‘Coddling’ documentary turns one, & more!
Bringing you the latest free speech news (2/23/25)
Stories of the week
America is not safe from harmful regulation because venture capitalists declare that to be the case on social media, or even because our federal government is led by avowed skeptics of AI regulation. Instead, quite the opposite is true: we are well on our way to imposing a version of EU AI policy, inflected with American center-left quirks (“disparate impact” theories of discrimination). At this point, I am genuinely uncertain if this outcome can be avoided. If these laws pass, federal preemption will likely become harder, not easier, because federal representatives of states with these laws will be reticent to take power away from the states they represent.
I wish I had a more positive story to tell you here, but unfortunately I do not. This is simply the reality, as I see it, of where things stand. The Brussels Effect seems to be winning, regardless of what the “vibes” seem to be telling us. Absent some kind of major course correction, the path ahead is clear: within a year or two, artificial intelligence will be the most heavily regulated general-purpose digital technology in American history.
The city of Clarksdale, Mississippi, thinks it knows better than the Founders. Clarksdale asked a court to order a local newspaper to remove an editorial asking why the city was not being more transparent about a proposed tax increase. As a result of the city’s lawsuit, a court ordered the Clarksdale Press Register to delete the online editorial.
That’s unconstitutional. In the United States, the government can’t determine what opinions may be shared in the public square. A free society does not permit governments to sue newspapers for publishing editorials.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting First Amendment rights, is exploring all options to aid The Press Register in defending these core expressive rights.
Germans are being arrested for insulting politicians — we need to protect free speech so it never happens here (NY Post) by
Therein lies an important truth: once you open the door to prosecuting “hate speech,” you no longer actually have free speech. “Hate speech” is an amorphous term that can be defined differently by every judge, every prosecutor, and every individual.
This week in FIRE’s blog
The FTC is overstepping its authority — and threatening free speech online by
US Attorney Ed Martin’s bully tactics have no place in America by
& Will CreeleyQuran burner assassinated in Sweden — and another arrested in the UK by
Iraqi refugee Salwan Momika, known for his well-publicized and controversial public Quran burnings, was assassinated on Jan. 29 in Sweden. Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson suggested “there is obviously a risk that there is also a link to foreign power” involved. Days later, a Swedish court fined and issued a suspended sentence to Salwan Najem, another Iraqi refugee who burned Qurans with Momika, who was convicted of incitement against an ethnic group. The similar charges against Momika were dropped in light of his killing.
FIRE demands Fort Worth police return artwork confiscated from museum
When universities take sides, we all lose by Ross Marchand
60 Minutes and Vice President Vance put Europe’s worrying speech restrictions into the spotlight by
This week on
This week, FIRE EVP &
host sat down with FIRE’s Chief Counsel Bob Corn-Revere and General Counsel (and ERI’s own ‘London Calling’ contributor) Ronnie London to talk about JD Vance’s recent warning about the state of free speech in Europe, a bizarre segment on 60 Minutes, the Trump administration’s banning of AP from the Oval Office, the FCC and more.
This week in ERI
More tips for being non-partisan in a partisan age by me (thanks, Eugene Volokh, for the shout-out!)
London Calling: Ronnie’s First Amendment Roundup
It’s nice when things you count on – like the Section 230 immunity from liability for third-party content relied on by social media platforms and other interactive computer services – continue to hold up, even amidst court cases (and legislative saber-rattling) that seek to weaken its foundations. This week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the dismissal of claims for strict products liability, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and violation of Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, brought by an underage user of Grindr, primarily on grounds that Section 230 bars liability. The court holds that the theory underpinning the claims “necessarily implicates Grindr’s role as a publisher of third-party content,” and rejects plaintiff’s position that Grindr had a duty to design around, warn about, and/or suppress matches between adults and children (who misrepresent themselves as of-age to use the app). The court also affirms dismissal of the TVPRA claim, and the inapplicability of its Section 230 carve-out, because the complaint showed only that Grindr is a platform that facilitates sharing of messages between users, while its allegation that the platform “knowingly introduces children to adults” was not supported by plausible allegations – especially given that the complaint itself asserted Grindr matches users who represent themselves as over eighteen years old.
International free speech stories of the week
Man attacked with knife after burning Quran near Turkish consulate in London (The Jerusalem Post)
Placebo’s Brian Molko Charged With Defamation for Calling Italian Prime Minister “Fascist, Racist” (Pitchfork) by Nina Corcoran
Hong Kong director Jun Li’s pro-Palestine speech in Berlin sparks German probe (South China Morning Post) by Harvey Kong
Documentary of the month
Friday marked the one-year anniversary of the official Substack release of ‘The Coddling of the American Mind’ documentary. Huge shout-outs to Courtney and
for their incredible work putting Jonathan Haidt and my book on screen and, in doing so, reaching a wider and larger audience than even our NYT bestseller ever could have hoped for. If you haven’t yet had the chance to see it, it’s available on Amazon Prime, AppleTV, and Google Play in addition to Substack.
I love how every issue of ERI is "Not Approved by the Comics Code Authority".
If one knows the history of the CCA, and their association with actual book-burning and authoritarian censorship, that is completely appropriate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics_Code_Authority
There are two totally separate categories of AI regulation - the first is a sort of DEI based “disparate impact” analysis discussed in this article, focused on content, and the other is for reasons of national security and safety, focused on capabilities (supercharged AI agents will be the most powerful spying tool in history). The former is stupid and should be opposed at all costs, and the latter is pretty much mandatory for maintaining a free society into the future.