US bans five Europeans over alleged censorship pressure, sparking EU backlash, prompting a sharp response from the EU and its member states.
US Announcement
On Tuesday, the U.S. State Department announced the bans, citing Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s description of the individuals as “radical” activists and “weaponized” NGOs. Rubio posted on X that “for far too long, ideologues in Europe have led organized efforts to coerce American platforms to punish American viewpoints they oppose.” He added that “the Trump Administration will no longer tolerate these egregious acts of extraterritorial censorship.”
EU and Member State Reactions
European Commission warned it would take action against any “unjustified measures” and requested clarification from the U.S. State Department. It stated that “the EU is an open, rules-based single market, with the sovereign right to regulate economic activity in line with our democratic values and international commitments.” The Commission added that “our digital rules ensure a safe, fair, and level playing field for all companies, applied fairly and without discrimination.”
French President Emmanuel Macron said on X that he had spoken to Thierry Breton about the U.S. move and that “we will stand firm against pressure and will protect Europeans.” He highlighted that EU digital rules were adopted through “a democratic and sovereign process” involving all member countries and the European Parliament, and that they “ensure fair competition among platforms, without targeting any third country.”
German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul posted on X that the entry bans, including those on HateAid leaders, were “not acceptable.” He said Germany intended to address the U.S. “interpretation” of the EU’s digital rules with Washington to strengthen the partnership.
EU Council President António Costa called the bans “unacceptable between allies, partners, and friends” and posted that “the EU stands firm in its defense of freedom of expression, fair digital rules, and its regulatory sovereignty.”
The United Kingdom government said, “While every country has the right to set its own visa rules, we support the laws and institutions which are working to keep the Internet free from the most harmful content.”
Individuals Banned
The five Europeans are:
- Thierry Breton, former EU commissioner responsible for supervising social media rules, a businessman and former French finance minister.
- Imran Ahmed, chief executive of the Center for Countering Digital Hate.
- Josephine Ballon and Anna-Lena von Hodenberg, leaders of HateAid, a German organization.
- Clare Melford, who runs the Global Disinformation Index.
Breton had clashed last year on social media with tech billionaire Elon Musk over broadcasting an online interview with Donald Trump in the months leading up to the U.S. election.
Context of U.S. Visa Policy
The bans stem from a new visa policy announced in May that restricts entry of foreigners deemed responsible for censorship of protected speech in the United States. Rubio said the five had advanced foreign government censorship campaigns against Americans and U.S. companies, creating “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences” for the United States. The action uses immigration law to counter foreign influence over online speech.
EU Digital Services Act
Sarah Rogers, U.S. under secretary of state for public diplomacy, called Breton the “mastermind” behind the EU’s Digital Services Act, which imposes strict requirements to keep internet users safe, including flagging harmful or illegal content like hate speech.
Breton responded on X noting that all 27 EU member countries voted for the Digital Services Act in 2022 and wrote, “To our American friends: ‘Censorship isn’t where you think it is.'”
Key Takeaways
- The U.S. has barred five Europeans from entering the country, citing alleged pressure on tech firms to censor American viewpoints.
- EU leaders and the Commission defend the Digital Services Act as a fair, non-discriminatory framework.
- The bans reflect a U.S. strategy using immigration law to address perceived foreign influence over online speech.
The move has intensified tensions between Washington and Brussels, with both sides underscoring their commitment to their respective regulatory and diplomatic principles.
