The latest skirmish in the escalating war between the US and Europe over free speech involves the US State Department barring five Europeans from entering the US because of work they have done to fight disinformation and hate speech on social media platforms, which largely consist of US companies. This action comes on the heels of the EU Commission’s decision to fine X (formerly Twitter) the sum of $140 million USD for violation of its Digital Services Act (DSA), a law recently enacted to regulate Internet platforms.

This blog has been critical of the DSA and other EU attempts to regulate speech on the Internet, primarily because “disinformation” and “hate speech” are not sufficiently defined. Determining what is legally protected speech versus illegal disinformation and hate speech can be difficult, if not impossible. Moreover, should far-right political parties continue to gain power in Europe, the DSA (and/or similar national legislation) could be used to stifle speech that current left-of-center regimes would consider to be clearly protected.

I have been especially critical of Thierry Breton, the former EU Commissioner, who is one of the individuals who is barred from the US. Mr. Breton has been particularly vitriolic in his criticisms of American tech companies and insensitive to legitimate concerns about the effect of the DSA on freedom of expression. The other individuals barred from the US are connected with non-government organizations (NGOs) devoted to policing inappropriate speech on the Internet.

The debate over freedom of expression on the Internet, and the need to combat disinformation and hate speech, is a healthy one that should be encouraged in liberal democracies like the US and Europe that purport to honor and promote free political discourse. Such a debate, conducted in a respectful and thoughtful manner, is the only way eventually come to some sort of balance between the competing interests of freedom of expression and the dangers of disinformation and hate speech. Moreover, if the Europeans want to strike a different balance than Americans, then we Americans should honor that, while retaining the right to criticize it.

However, banning Europeans from entering the US because of their views on this important issue is the height of hypocrisy. There simply is no way to reconcile punishing someone for exercising their free speech rights, advocating for limiting harmful speech on the Internet, merely because you have concluded that those views conflict with your supposed more expansive views on free speech. If one truly has principled expansive views of free speech, they should welcome the debate and stand up for the rights of their opponents’ rights to express a contrary viewpoint.

Elon Musk, who claims to be a free speech purist, should be appalled by this action if he cared about intellectual consistency. Instead, he reposted a tweet from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., celebrating the banning of the Europeans, and declaring that, “Once again, the United States is the mecca for freedom of speech.” It is becoming apparent that Mr. Musk is only a champion of the free speech of those with whom he agrees.

The action taken by the Trump State Department also raises serious questions about the extent to which the government should be doing the bidding of billionaires such as Musk. If Musk has the influence to punish citizens of our closest allies merely because he disagrees with them, will punishing American citizens for controversial views that target billionaires be far off?