Speaking with the Trump administration Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller’s wife, Katie Miller, yesterday, Attorney General Pam Bondi decried “hate speech” and vowed to “target anyone with hate speech.”
“There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech,” Bondi explained.
We will absolutely target you, go after you if you are targeting anyone with hate speech, anything, and that’s across the aisle. There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society.
Nope. Liberty First!pic.twitter.com/tB32n44Eyh
— James Lindsay, anti-Communist (@ConceptualJames) September 16, 2025
Related: MAGA Influencer Accuses AG Pam Bondi of First Amendment Violation on X
Citing “hate speech” as the justification for censorship has long been a leftist rhetorical device.
Then-vice presidential nominee Tim Walz, in 2024, issued almost the verbatim declaration that Bondi did yesterday: “There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.”
“There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech.”
— Tim Walz pic.twitter.com/js8WhTpqkt
— The Rabbit Hole (@TheRabbitHole84) September 17, 2024
The anti-free speech agenda appears to be a bipartisan effort.
Sen. Chris Coons and Sen. James Lankford, over the weekend, appeared on corporate state media to opportunistically push the euphemistically titled “S.1748 – Kids Online Safety Act,” currently sitting in the Senate pending passage.
That sounds really great — wholesome and necessary.
What kind of monster could oppose safety, especially “kids’ online safety”?
Related: British PM: We Censor Anti-Migrant Protests ‘For the Children’
Well, the devil is in the details.
Via Electronic Frontier Foundation (emphasis added):
At the center of the bill is a requirement that platforms “exercise reasonable care” to prevent and mitigate a sweeping list of harms to minors, including depression, anxiety, eating disorders, substance use, bullying, and “compulsive usage.”…
Its core function is to let government agencies sue platforms, big or small, that don’t block or restrict content someone later claims contributed to one of these harms….
To avoid liability, platforms will over-censor. It’s not merely hypothetical. It’s what happens when speech becomes a legal risk. The list of harms in KOSA’s “duty of care” provision is so broad and vague that no platform will know what to do regarding any given piece of content. Forums won’t be able to host posts with messages like “love your body,” “please don’t do drugs,” or “here’s how I got through depression” without fearing that an attorney general or FTC lawyer might later decide the content was harmful…
KOSA will not make kids safer. It will make the internet more dangerous for anyone who relies on it to learn, connect, or speak freely.
Like “national security,” “kids’ online safety” is just another form of window-dressing with which to gaslight the public.
Related: AG Pam Bondi: Still-Unreleased Epstein Files to Be Redacted for ‘National Security’
Here’s Charlie Kirk himself on “hate speech”:
Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.
Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech.
And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment.
Keep America free.
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 3, 2024
