🔗 Share this article The United States Refuses Entry Permits to Ex-EU Commissioner and Others Regarding Online Platform Policies Thierry Breton, who has clashed with Elon Musk. The US State Department declared it would refuse entry permits to a group of five people, among them a ex-European Union official, for reportedly seeking to "pressure" American social media platforms into curtailing opinions they disagree with. "These radical activists and weaponized NGOs have advanced censorship crackdowns by foreign states - in each case focusing on American speakers and US firms," said Secretary of State the official. Thierry Breton suggested that a "witch hunt" was taking place. Officials labeled Breton as the "key designer" of the European Union's online content law, which imposes speech regulations on digital platforms. A Contentious Law Yet, it has angered some US conservatives who see it as seeking to censor right-wing opinions. EU authorities rejects this characterization. Breton has clashed with the billionaire entrepreneur, owner of platform X, over obligations to adhere to EU rules. EU regulators imposed a penalty on X €120m over its verification system – the inaugural penalty under the DSA. Regulators stated the platform's system was "misleading" because the firm was not "meaningfully verifying users". As a countermove, the platform blocked the European body from making adverts on its platform. Responses and Additional Restrictions Reacting to the visa ban, the former commissioner wrote on X: "Addressing the US: Speech suppression isn't where you think it is." Clare Melford, who leads the UK-based disinformation research group, was included in the sanctions. US Undersecretary of State Sarah B Rogers alleged the GDI of using American public funds "to encourage censorship and blacklisting of US expression and press". A GDI spokesperson characterized the visa sanctions as "an authoritarian attack on free speech and an egregious act of government censorship". "Their actions today are immoral, illegal, and contrary to American values," the spokesperson added. Another figure of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a nonprofit that fights digital hatred and misinformation, was similarly issued a ban. Rogers labeled Mr Ahmed a "primary partner with campaigns to weaponize the government against US citizens". Additionally facing restrictions were two executives of HateAid, which the State Department said helped enforce the DSA. Responding, the two leaders described it as an "act of repression by a administration that is showing disregard for the rule of law". "We will not be intimidated by a state that uses claims of suppression to silence those who defend human rights," they added. Policy Justification Rubio said that action was initiated to enact entry bans on "agents of the global censorship-industrial complex" who would be "generally barred from entering the United States". "The administration has been clear that his America First diplomatic stance rejects violations of American sovereignty. Foreign-imposed regulations by foreign censors aimed at American speech is unacceptable," he affirmed.
Thierry Breton, who has clashed with Elon Musk. The US State Department declared it would refuse entry permits to a group of five people, among them a ex-European Union official, for reportedly seeking to "pressure" American social media platforms into curtailing opinions they disagree with. "These radical activists and weaponized NGOs have advanced censorship crackdowns by foreign states - in each case focusing on American speakers and US firms," said Secretary of State the official. Thierry Breton suggested that a "witch hunt" was taking place. Officials labeled Breton as the "key designer" of the European Union's online content law, which imposes speech regulations on digital platforms. A Contentious Law Yet, it has angered some US conservatives who see it as seeking to censor right-wing opinions. EU authorities rejects this characterization. Breton has clashed with the billionaire entrepreneur, owner of platform X, over obligations to adhere to EU rules. EU regulators imposed a penalty on X €120m over its verification system – the inaugural penalty under the DSA. Regulators stated the platform's system was "misleading" because the firm was not "meaningfully verifying users". As a countermove, the platform blocked the European body from making adverts on its platform. Responses and Additional Restrictions Reacting to the visa ban, the former commissioner wrote on X: "Addressing the US: Speech suppression isn't where you think it is." Clare Melford, who leads the UK-based disinformation research group, was included in the sanctions. US Undersecretary of State Sarah B Rogers alleged the GDI of using American public funds "to encourage censorship and blacklisting of US expression and press". A GDI spokesperson characterized the visa sanctions as "an authoritarian attack on free speech and an egregious act of government censorship". "Their actions today are immoral, illegal, and contrary to American values," the spokesperson added. Another figure of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a nonprofit that fights digital hatred and misinformation, was similarly issued a ban. Rogers labeled Mr Ahmed a "primary partner with campaigns to weaponize the government against US citizens". Additionally facing restrictions were two executives of HateAid, which the State Department said helped enforce the DSA. Responding, the two leaders described it as an "act of repression by a administration that is showing disregard for the rule of law". "We will not be intimidated by a state that uses claims of suppression to silence those who defend human rights," they added. Policy Justification Rubio said that action was initiated to enact entry bans on "agents of the global censorship-industrial complex" who would be "generally barred from entering the United States". "The administration has been clear that his America First diplomatic stance rejects violations of American sovereignty. Foreign-imposed regulations by foreign censors aimed at American speech is unacceptable," he affirmed.