Connect with us

Politics

Trump talks 'free speech' while moving to muzzle those he disagrees with

Published

on

Trump talks 'free speech' while moving to muzzle those he disagrees with

In one of his first acts in office, President Trump issued an executive order promising to end government censorship and restore free speech.

The order accused the outgoing Biden administration of harassing social media companies and violating the rights of average Americans “under the guise” of combating disinformation online, and said federal resources would no longer be used to “unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.”

The order echoed a recurring theme from Trump’s campaign — that liberals across the federal government are censoring conservative voices to advance their own “woke” agenda — and immediately resonated with his followers.

“This order is a critical step to ensure the government cannot dictate what speech is permissible or weaponize private entities to enforce censorship,” said Mark Trammell of the Center for American Liberty, a conservative rights group founded by California attorney Harmeet K. Dhillon, Trump’s nominee to lead the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.

However, many others said they found Trump’s order absurd — both because of his long track record of attacking speech he doesn’t like, and because of his new administration’s simultaneous efforts to muzzle people it disagrees with, including journalists, federal health officials, teachers, diplomats, climate scientists and the LGBTQ+ community.

Advertisement

“Let’s not be naive,” said Hadar Harris, the Washington managing director of PEN America, which has advocated for free speech in the U.S. for more than a century. “While some of President Trump’s flurry of executive orders pay lip service to free speech, in reality they frame a frontal assault against it, dictating the terms of allowable expression and identities, demanding political loyalty from civil servants, and threatening retaliation against dissent in ways that could cast a broad chill on free expression well beyond the halls of government.”

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said Trump’s claiming to be a free speech champion while attacking the media and harshly restricting how longtime civil servants can communicate with the public — including in critical areas such as public health — was “ironic and hypocritical.”

“It’s classic Trump administration,” Bonta said. “It’s their rhetoric versus their actions, and you have to look at their actions.”

Limiting communication

Both at home and abroad, the Trump administration has ordered federal employees and diplomats to cease communications on a range of issues, including “diversity, equity and inclusion,” “environmental justice” and “gender ideology.”

It ordered Department of Defense officials to stop posting information on official social media accounts unless it is about the southern border, and health and other federal experts to limit communications even on critical public safety issues such as the spread of bird flu — which California officials have declared an emergency.

Advertisement

Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, a public health professor and infectious-disease expert at USC, said he was alarmed Thursday when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention withdrew from a planned bird flu discussion with the Infectious Disease Society of America. Klausner said their pulling out was “a big loss for our ability to understand what’s going on” nationally.

Klausner said past administrations have given health leaders new orders — to curtail spending, shift priorities — but never such directives to halt so many critical communications at once. He called it “extremely concerning.”

Trump also has ordered a sweeping crackdown on federal communications about the LGBTQ+ community — removing LGBTQ+ resource materials from government websites and placing new restrictions on how federal employees can discuss or speak to LGBTQ+ people — or even use words such as “sex” or “gender.”

He has threatened similar restrictions on public school teachers and administrators, and ordered that LGBTQ+ Americans may no longer identify as transgender on passports and other documents.

Jenny Pizer, chief legal officer for the LGBTQ+ legal advocacy group Lambda Legal, said Trump’s orders are “the antithesis of free speech” and a clear government attempt to “silence people, to chill speech” — which is illegal.

Advertisement

She pointed to new rules barring federal employees, contractors and materials from referencing gender identity or fluidity. “Those concepts are being censored, and the language with which one articulates the concepts is being censored,” she said.

Lambda Legal has fought such efforts before. When Trump in 2020 issued an executive order barring federal grantees conducting workplace diversity training from referencing topics such as implicit bias or critical race theory — calling them “divisive concepts” — Lambda Legal and others sued and won an injunction blocking the order.

Trump has also kept up his criticism of the news media, calling journalists the “enemy of the people.” He is suing various media organizations — including the board of the Pulitzer Prizes and the Des Moines Register and its parent company, Gannett — over journalism he claims was libelous or unfair. The outlets have defended their work.

Katherine Jacobsen, U.S. program coordinator at the Committee to Protect Journalists, said journalists would welcome an honest effort to bolster free speech protections across the political spectrum, but Trump’s order isn’t that.

“What we’ve seen in this post-election period — and even before the election kicked off, in his last presidency — is that he hasn’t really been willing to support free speech when it counters his narrative,” Jacobsen said.

Advertisement

Online debate

At the core of Trump’s censorship order is his claim that the Biden administration “trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech,” including by “exerting substantial coercive pressure” on online platforms.

It is not a new argument.

After the Jan. 6, 2021, attack and multiple investigations into efforts by foreign adversaries to spread disinformation and sow distrust in the American political system, social media companies promised to crack down — including by suspending thousands of accounts. Under the Biden administration, officials kept up pressure on those platforms to take down posts the administration deemed false and dangerous, including about U.S. election integrity but also the COVID-19 pandemic.

Those efforts increasingly rankled Republicans and eventually Republican states sued, accusing the Biden administration of illegally coercing the platforms to erase conservative content.

Experts say claims of liberal bias on social platforms are generally overblown, and point to thriving conservative communities online as proof. However, surveys have shown that many conservatives believe that bias exists. And Meta’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, recently lent credence to the claims by complaining publicly and to Congress about pressure his company received from the Biden administration to remove or limit the spread of certain content, including satirical content about COVID-19.

Advertisement

Lawyers for the Biden administration have said there is a difference between legitimate persuasion and inappropriate coercion, and that communication channels between government and social media companies had to remain open for public safety reasons. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Biden administration in June, finding the states had no standing to sue. Litigation around the issue persists.

In the meantime, tech leaders were shifting away from moderation — and toward Trump.

Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, purchased the social media platform X — then Twitter — in October 2022 on a promise to make it more free. He has described himself as a “free speech absolutist” and said Twitter wasn’t living up to its potential as a “platform for free speech” — which he said he would fix by loosening content restrictions.

Since then, Musk has joined Trump’s inner circle, spent more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help reelect Trump and Republicans in Congress, and been appointed by Trump to lead a new agency called the “Department of Government Efficiency,” raising all sorts of questions about conflicts given contracts Musk — also chief executive of SpaceX and Tesla — holds with the federal government.

Critics have also questioned Musk’s commitment to free speech. He has kicked journalists covering him off X and amplified conservative talking points on the platform. In September, X disclosed it had suspended nearly 5.3 million accounts in the first half of last year, compared with 1.6 million accounts it suspended in the first half of 2022.

Advertisement

Earlier this month, Zuckerberg of Meta — which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp — announced his company had allowed for “too much censorship” and would be getting rid of fact-checkers, reducing content restrictions and serving up more political content.

Zuckerberg then went on the popular Joe Rogan podcast, where he said corporate America had been “neutered” and “emasculated” and complained bitterly about Biden administration officials calling Meta team members to demand they take down certain content — while “threatening repercussions if we don’t.”

A host of other tech leaders in addition to Musk and Zuckerberg — Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and the chief executives of Apple, Google and TikTok — were on hand for Trump’s inauguration. Many also donated to the events.

Trammell, of the Center for American Liberty, said the Biden administration violated the rights of average Americans with such actions, and that Trump’s order “reaffirms America’s commitment to free expression.” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who as chair of the House Judiciary Committee has overseen investigations into social media bias, noted the anti-censorship order, among others, in a post on X, writing, “Common sense is back!”

Harris, of PEN America, said her organization agrees that “government censorship of speech is intolerable in a free society,” as Trump’s order states, and that the government must “take care” in how it addresses things like disinformation on social media platforms “so as not to infringe on free speech.”

Advertisement

However, the government “should be able to communicate and engage in information sharing with tech companies when disinformation is swirling online during a natural disaster, pandemic, foreign interference in an election, or other moment of heightened tension and risks to the public,” Harris said.

While purporting to defend speech already protected by the 1st Amendment, Trump’s order would make such necessary communication “impossible” and “limit the government’s ability to address disinformation at all,” Harris said — “giving disinformation free reign.”

Speaking out

Kate Oakley, senior director of legal policy at the pro-LGBTQ+ Human Rights Campaign, said while there are some legitimate restrictions on free speech — you can’t scream ‘fire!” in a crowded theater, for example — the Constitution already protects American citizens from the sort of government censorship that Trump purports to target with his order.

It also protects them from some of the things Trump’s other orders would usher in if implemented, she said.

“What he wants to do is make sure that speech or beliefs that are critical of him have less opportunity to be expressed, that speech or beliefs that are praising him have more ability to be out there, and to the extent that people are saying, doing, believing, reading things that he doesn’t approve of, he would like to shut that down and is taking actions to do so,” Oakley said.

Advertisement

But “our government does not get to tell us those things,” Oakley said, and groups such as hers are going to be using their voice to argue that point vociferously — including, if necessary, in court.

Bonta, California’s attorney general, said Trump is a “seasoned salesman” when it comes to saying one thing and doing another, but California will not be fooled and will also be calling out Trump’s anti-free speech actions and those that threaten public safety.

Pizer, of Lambda Legal, said legal intervention from groups like hers may not come immediately, as some of the orders are “still amorphous or theoretical enough that we can’t see what the effect will be.” But they are watching closely, she said, and already see the pain.

“The reality,” she said, “is that lovely, wonderful people who never did anything to hurt anybody are going to be suffering along the way as we try to shut this stuff down as fast as we can.”

Times staff writer Tracy Wilkinson in Washington contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Trump Wants to Impose 25% Tariffs on Colombia. Here’s What Could Cost More.

Published

on

Trump Wants to Impose 25% Tariffs on Colombia. Here’s What Could Cost More.

The possibility of a trade war erupted on Sunday between the United States and Colombia that could make coffee, flowers and raw materials more expensive for Americans, while U.S. corn growers and chemical companies could find billions of dollars in sales at risk.

Relations between the two countries quickly deteriorated after the South American country refused to receive U.S. military planes carrying deported immigrants. In response, President Trump said on social media that he would immediately impose a 25 percent tariff on all Colombian imports and escalate the tariffs to 50 percent in a week. Colombia’s president, Gustavo Petro, threatened his own 50 percent tariff hours later.

The United States is Colombia’s largest trading partner, but Colombian products make up a relatively minor share of U.S. imports. Some Colombian products are much more exposed than others.

While crude oil is by far the United States’ most valuable Colombian import, accounting for $5.4 billion of the $16 billion worth of products the United States imported from there in 2023, that’s just a tiny share of overall crude imports. Colombia accounted for more than a third of the total nursery stock imports and about 20 percent of coffee imports, according to the Census Bureau. That could mean more expensive coffee and flowers ahead of Valentine’s Day.

While the U.S. economy is a vastly bigger market than Colombia’s, it is also likely to feel some pain if the tariffs do get imposed. The industries most likely to be affected are agriculture and suppliers of the raw materials that are the building blocks of industry. U.S. makers of petroleum products, for instance, did about $2.5 billion in business with Colombia in 2023. The next most valuable annual exports to the country were corn ($1.2 billion) and chemicals ($1 billion).

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

After raucous first week in office, Donald Trump to keep his foot on the gas

Published

on

After raucous first week in office, Donald Trump to keep his foot on the gas

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

Following a torrid first week in office, President Donald Trump does not have a very busy public schedule on Monday. That does not mean there won’t be plenty of action. The 47th president is known to spring major actions and announcements without much notice.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION NEEDS MORE PLANES TO CARRY OUT DEPORTATIONS: REPORT

Advertisement

President Donald Trump speaks to the media after signing executive orders in the Oval Office on Jan. 23, 2025. (ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP via Getty Images)

The president starts off the week by attending a House GOP Conference meeting at Trump National Doral Miami at a time to be determined. The GOP January retreat is an opportunity for Republicans to game-plan their approach to implementing their shared agenda with President Trump. Major policy initiatives that are likely to be addressed are the president’s sweeping border security and ongoing deportation initiatives, increasing domestic energy production and advancing a new tax plan.

House Speaker Mike Johnson told Politico that he expects to have a “blueprint” for a massive reconciliation package in place after the retreat. The House Budget Committee, which is tasked with writing the instructions on the bill, is set to meet next week.

Johnson sent a letter to the president to address a joint session of Congress on March 4, 2025. In the letter, Johnson wrote, “Your administration and the 119th Congress working together have the chance to make these next four years some of the most consequential in our nation’s history.”

He went on to write, “To that end, it is my distinct honor and great privilege to invite you to address a Joint Session of Congress on Tuesday, March 4, 2025, in the Chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives, to share your America First vision for our legislative future. I eagerly await your response.”

Advertisement

SPEAKER JOHNSON INVITES TRUMP TO ADDRESS CONGRESS AMID BUSY FIRST 100-DAY SPRINT

House Speaker Mike Johnson and President-elect Donald Trump shake hands

House Speaker Mike Johnson shakes hands with President-elect Donald Trump on Nov. 13, 2024. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Another event that is key to an early Trump priority will be a hearing at the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation titled “Fees and Foreign Influence: Examining the Panama Canal and Its Impact on U.S. Trade and National Security.” The committee is headed by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

In his inaugural address, Trump said, “China is operating the Panama Canal. And we didn’t give it to China, we gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.”

Newly confirmed Secretary of State Marco Rubio is scheduled to visit Panama this week. According to the State Department, the trip will include visits to the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Guatemala and El Salvador.

Advertisement

Confirmation hearings continue in the Senate this week with Tulsi Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Kelly Loeffler and Kash Patel all appearing.

Continued immigration and deportation activities are expected to continue with border czar Tom Homan and the acting deputy attorney general, Emil Bove, traveling to Chicago on Sunday to witness the stepped-up enforcement actions.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump punishes Colombia for refusing entry to deportation flights

Published

on

Trump punishes Colombia for refusing entry to deportation flights

Facing another early challenge to his immigration policies, President Trump on Sunday ordered a 25% tariff on exports from Colombia and a travel ban on Colombian officials and “their supporters” as punishment for the country’s refusal to accept military deportation flights from the U.S.

“These measures are just the beginning,” Trump declared on social media.

Colombia’s action came as numerous countries in Latin America are attempting to figure out how to deal with the week-old Trump administration, pledging cooperation on some immigration issues but also seeking fair treatment and respect for their own national sovereignty.

Media reports in the U.S. quoted Pentagon officials as saying Mexico also denied landing permission to a deportation flight late last week. While Mexico did not explicitly confirm or deny the action, its Foreign Ministry emphasized its spirit of continued cooperation with the U.S. President Claudia Sheinbaum said she would address the matter Monday.

Nevertheless, tensions are high in Mexico, the country that is the largest source of U.S.-bound migrants and where tens of thousands are becoming stranded as Trump ends amnesty and other legal-entry programs.

Advertisement

Both Colombia and Mexico in the past accepted some deportation flights but may be reacting now to Trump’s threats to increase the number exponentially and include more third-country migrants. Some in the region are also unnerved by the switch from civilian aircraft to U.S. military planes used in the deportations.

Trump said he would raise the tariffs on all Colombian goods coming to the U.S. to 50% after one week if flights are not allowed. While Colombia is not high on the list of the region’s traders with the U.S., exporting only about $16 billion in goods, coffee is among its top commodities. It also exports roses and other fresh-cut flowers, used widely in the U.S. on holidays like Valentines Day.

He also said he was revoking U.S. visas from various members of the Colombian government, putting visa restrictions on tens of thousands of other Colombians, enhancing customs and border inspections on people and cargo from Colombia and imposing a raft of unspecified financial and banking sanctions.

Trump’s wrath came in response to actions by Gustavo Petro, the left-leaning president of Colombia, who is dealing with his own immigration crisis: the arrival of massive numbers of people fleeing neighbor Venezuela.

“I was just informed that two repatriation flights from the United States, with a large number of Illegal Criminals, were not allowed to land in Colombia,” Trump wrote. “We will not allow the Colombian Government to violate its legal obligations with regard to the acceptance and return of the Criminals they forced into the United States!”

Advertisement

The two military C-17 aircraft departed San Diego with about 80 migrants and headed for Colombia before being turned around, officials said.

With Trump’s rise to power, Petro made a brief attempt at avoiding confrontation, but that seems to have vanished.

Also writing on social media, Petro earlier Sunday did not rule out allowing the repatriation of Colombian nationals but said the process had to be “dignified.”

“The U.S. cannot treat Colombian migrants like criminals,” Petro wrote. “I am denying the entry of United States airplanes with Colombian migrants to our territory. The U.S. must establish a protocol for the dignified treatment of migrants before we receive them.”

He later said he would offer his presidential plane to pick up Colombian deportees to avoid them being left stranded and stateless. He also suggested he would impose a 25% tariff on U.S. exports.

Advertisement

The defiance from Latin America comes ahead of Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s trip later this week to the region, his first as Trump’s top diplomat. Neither Colombia nor Mexico are on his itinerary, although immigration will be on his agenda, especially in Panama, Guatemala and El Salvador.

He is expected to press the countries to accept deportees. In Panama, the topic of Trump’s desire to seize the Panama Canal will also dominate discussions. (The other countries he will visit are Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic.)

Throughout the region, Rubio is also hoping to begin to counter China’s growing economic and diplomatic influence.

Guatemala on Friday allowed three U.S. flights — two military and one charter — to land there carrying 265 expelled migrants. And Brazil allowed two flights last week but complained that returning migrants were shackled.

“President Trump has made it clear that under his administration, America will no longer be lied to nor taken advantage of,” Rubio said in a terse statement reacting to Petro’s position on the flights. He said it was the responsibility of nations to take back their citizens who are in the United States without legal authorization.

Advertisement

But, he said, “Colombian President Petro had authorized flights and provided all needed authorizations and then canceled his authorization when the planes were in the air.”

Resistance to Trump’s immigration crackdown in which he has threatened to expel several million people, including some who are in the United States legally but temporarily, is percolating slowly as advocates and the courts grasp the exact nature of the administration’s plans.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Sunday announced it had launched long-anticipated raids in Chicago aimed at preserving “public safety and national security” by rounding up immigrants and “keeping potentially dangerous criminal aliens out of our communities.” ICE teamed up with the FBI, U.S. Marshals and several other federal agencies.

The first challenge to Trump’s immigration plan came swiftly, when a federal judge blocked the administration’s attempt to deny automatic U.S. citizenship to people born in the U.S. to noncitizens. Automatic, or birthright citizenship, is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The judge, a Reagan appointee based in Seattle, granted a stay in Trump officials’ attempt to enact the change in law.

Trump has portrayed the illegal entry of migrants over the southern U.S. border as an invasion. Although illegal crossings did rise early in the Biden administration, they fell sharply over the last year, with current levels the lowest they’ve been since Trump left office.

Advertisement

The White House made a big splash of the start of the deportation flights, although thousands of such deportations took place under Biden, albeit not with military participation.

Will Freeman, an expert on Colombia at the Council on Foreign Relations, said Petro will eventually be forced to back down but seems to want the fight for now.

“I can’t think of many *worse* strategic blunders for the U.S., as it competes w/ China, than going nuclear against its oldest strategic ally & last big country in S. America where it enjoys a trade advantage,” Freeman said on social media.

“Colombia becomes a testing ground for the threat-forward approach to Latin America,” he added. “Colombians lose out, & so will the U.S. vis-a-vis China.”

Times staff writer Patrick McDonnell in Mexico City contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending