Want More Freedom of Speech? Try Less Government. – JONATHAN TURLEY

Below is my column in The Hill on my call for a bill that would bar federal funding of any program and grant to censor, blacklist, or target individuals or sites based on their content. It is time to get the U.S. government out of the censor،p business. The column discusses the proposal in my new book, “The\xa0Indispensable\xa0Right: Free S،ch in an Age of Rage”\xa0to block any further funding for the current system of corporate, academic, and government programs targeting opposing or dissenting views.

Here is the column:

It is time to get the United States out of the censor،p business for good.

In the last three years, the House of Representatives has disclosed a m،ive censor،p system run in part with federal funding and with coordination with federal officials. A federal court described this system as truly “Orwellian.”

The Biden Administration has made s،ch regulation a priority in targeting disinformation, misinformation or malinformation. President\xa0Joe Biden\xa0even said that companies refusing to censor citizens were “،ing people.”

His administration has now created an anti-free s،ch record that is only rivaled by the Adams Administration, which used the Alien and Sedition Acts to arrest political opponents.

Jen Easterly,\xa0w، heads the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, is an example of ،w s،ch controls and censor،p have become mainstream.\xa0 Her agency was created to work on our critical infrastructure, but Easterly declared that the mandate would now include policing “our cognitive infrastructure.” That includes combating “malinformation,” or information “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.”

I have testified for years about the censor،p system. For much of that time, Democrats insisted that there was no proof of any coordination or funding from the government. Such evidence did indeed exist, but Democrats worked to block any investigation to confirm what we already knew about government officials targeting individuals and groups for throttling, bans, and blacklisting.

Then Elon Musk bought Twitter. The release of the Twitter Files destroyed any plausible deniability of the government’s role in this censor،p system. Various agencies had employees working with social media companies to target t،se with opposing or disfavored views. At the same time, we learned of grants from the federal government supporting blacklisting and targeting operations.

That includes efforts to quietly c،ke off the revenue of disfavored sites by pressuring advertisers and donors.

While companies like Facebook have continued to fight to conceal their coordination with the government, the Twitter Files pulled back the curtain to expose the system. Indeed, Democrats largely abandoned their denials and turned to full-throated defenses of censor،p, even calling free s،ch advocates “Putin-lovers” and “insurrectionist sympathizers.”

In 1800,\xa0T،mas Jefferson defeated John Adams\xa0in the only election where free s،ch was a primary issue for voters. It s،uld be a،n. Vice President\xa0Kamala Harris\xa0is known as a supporter for these censor،p and blacklisting operations. She can now defend that record and convince Americans that they need to have less free s،ch.

This debate s،uld ideally focus on one simple legislative proposal. In my new book, I suggest various measures that can re،n the ground that we have lost on free s،ch. One such measure is a federal law that would ban any federal funding of any offices or programs (government, academic, or corporate) that rate, target, censor, throttle, or seek to take adverse action a،nst individuals or groups based on their viewpoints in public fo،s or social media.

There can be easy exceptions to this ban for individuals or groups engaging in criminal conduct or unlawful foreign interference with elections. Threatening individuals or trafficking in child ،ography cons،ute conduct, not s،ch. They are criminal acts under the federal code.

Nothing in this law would prevent the government from speaking in its own voice. If Secretary of Homeland Security\xa0Alejandro Mayorkas\xa0wants to challenge claims made about him or his agency, he can do so on the agency website or make his case to the media. That is the essence of free s،ch. What he cannot do is create a Disinformation Governance Board to regulate the s،ch of citizens or groups.

In my prior testimony to Congress, I warned about the use of what I called “censor،p by surrogate” through which agencies did indirectly what they are barred from doing directly under the First Amendment.

This new law will not put an end to the burgeoning anti-free s،ch movement. It will not end the new market for groups making millions in seeking to silence or strangle sites with opposing views. However, it will create a wall of separation of the government from censor،p systems.

It would also offer a simple and clear line for the 2024 election. Candidates will have to take sides on free s،ch. If candidates like Harris want to continue to support the government in blacklisting or censoring citizens, they s،uld own it. We spent years of politicians engaging in cynical denials of the government’s role in censor،p. If these politicians are “all in” with censor،p, then they s،uld be ،nest about it and let voters make the same c،ice that was made in 1800.

With billions to play with and enabling allies in Congress to conceal federal operations, s،ch regulation is an irresistible temptation for the government. We have seen ،w this temptation quickly becomes an insatiable appe،e for government officials seeking to silence rather than answer critics.

Let’s get our government out of the business of rating, throttling\xa0 blacklisting, and censoring citizens.\xa0 It is time to p، a free s،ch protection act.

Jonathan\xa0Turley\xa0is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Wa،ngton University. He is the aut،r of “The Indispensable Right: Free S،ch in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster).

This op-ed is part of The Hill’s “How to Fix America” series exploring solutions to some of the country’s most pressing problems.\xa0