ADF Testifies on European Threats to Americans’ Free Speech

Lorcán Price’s Testimony

Chairman Jordan, Ranking Member Raskin, Distinguished members of the committee, Ladies and Gentleman:

I’m delighted to share the panel today with fellow Irishman Graham Linehan. I’m not a comedy writer, so I won’t make a joke about two Irishmen who walk into Congress. Of course, I might be arrested on returning to London, as you indeed experienced, Graham. I’m also delighted to share with our client, Päivi Räsänen, who will speak in due course about her ordeal in Finland.

On the last occasion that we spoke on this subject, we had a discussion on the censorship potential of the EU’s Digital Services Act. At that point, we were speaking in the theoretical: it may cause censorship; it has the potential to affect Americans. 

Many were not convinced.

However, now, it’s unmistakable that it has indeed caused the censorship that we warned of. We have moved from theory to practice. There can be no doubt now that the European Digital Services Act is the tip of a massive censorship industrial complex. The enormous fines levied on X Corporation by the EU Commission since the last hearing have proved beyond all doubt that the EU means to strangle free speech by a systematic assault on US companies.

The EU has a multipronged strategy to open multiple investigations, to add more and more regulations, to impose crippling fines, and ultimately, I fear, to attempt to break up or ban companies such as X who are pro free speech.

But it goes deeper. This censorship campaign is not just aimed at destroying free speech in Europe. It’s about imposing EU laws on speech globally.

Make no mistake, Europe’s draconian speech laws are being imposed on your citizens via global content moderation rules, as indeed this committee’s investigation has so amply pointed out.

The EU’s obsession with eliminating free speech means they have a global campaign to ensure that all speech online and platforms that allow it are banning “illegal content” to prevent “systemic risk” to the “discourse.” US companies are therefore transformed into a global censorship police. They must engage in a process of analyzing “how platform design, algorithms, and content moderation impact public debate, disinformation, and media pluralism.”

This is what is being forced on American companies today. If they don’t comply, then they possibly face endless investigations and crippling fines. There are multiple ongoing investigations into X, including for allowing “illegal content.” In Europe, this can mean calling a German politician an idiot, or posting a Bible verse, etc.

Let’s be clear, what’s happening to X now is that free speech is such a threat to the European elites that they will either cripple X with fines and investigations, break up the company, or force them to bend the knee at the altar of censorship. I hope that they stand strong because we need free speech in Europe now more than ever.

I want to commend the committee on its investigation. It shows that U.S. companies are already having to adopt EU standards in their content moderation policies. So, it is directly affecting First Amendment rights of Americans today in practice.

There are also ongoing actions under the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and various other regulations. I think it’s fair to say that it’s come to a point where the EU has fines of American companies as a line item in their annual budget. Last year, roughly €3.8 billion was levied in fines against U.S. companies.

National countries are also trying to get into the act. We saw that the French police raided X’s offices in Paris just this week, and the Spanish Prime Minister has announced criminal liability against company owners for so-called “hate speech.”

I have submitted in my written testimony an excerpt of the ridiculous hate speech laws that we have to suffer under in Europe. Of course, hate speech has no real meaning except speech they hate. What I would say to our American friends is that we cannot allow the EU’s rules on hate speech to be imposed on the entire digital world by the DSA. Americans know how this goes when this committee in the past has exposed censorship around COVID. Tech censorship denudes and eliminates free speech online.

The threat is real, and it is with us now. Thank you very much, and I look forward to our discussion.

Päivi Räsänen’s Testimony

Chairman Jordan, Ranking Member Raskin, and Members of the Committee,

Thank you for inviting me to speak with you today.

My name is Dr. Päivi Räsänen, and I am from Finland. I am a medical doctor, and I have served as a Member of the Finnish Parliament since 1995. I previously served as Finland’s Minister of the Interior.

I love my country. Finland is a democracy that was built on the rule of law and fundamental freedoms. These values matter deeply to me as a European and a Christian.

More than six years ago, in 2019, I expressed my Christian beliefs about marriage and sexuality in a Twitter post. I directed my post to my church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, in response to their decision to participate in a Pride parade, which I believe contradicts our Christian faith. I added a picture of some Scripture verses with the post that guided my perspective on this issue.

I did so peacefully, without targeting or insulting anyone.

For this exercise of my free speech, I was investigated by the police. I was interrogated for more than thirteen hours. And I was charged with criminal “hate speech.” In addition to the Twitter post, I was also criminally charged for a short pamphlet on human sexuality I had written for the Church years earlier, in addition to comments I made in a radio discussion. Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola was charged alongside me for publishing my pamphlet for the church.

Under Finnish law, our charges fall under the section of the criminal code dealing with war crimes and crimes against humanity and can carry up to two years of prison time.

This was difficult to comprehend.

I want to be very clear. I did not insult anyone. I simply expressed my convictions rooted in my faith and conscience.

Twice, Finnish courts unanimously acquitted me. They ruled that no crime had been committed.

Despite these clear rulings, the state prosecution continued to pursue their charges against me.  And last October, the Supreme Court of Finland heard my case, alongside that of Bishop Pohjola. My defense was based on the freedoms of speech and religion protected by Finnish, European, and international law. The Bishop and I are now awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court.

This case has never been only about us. It is about whether peaceful expression of deeply held beliefs can be treated as a criminal act in today’s Europe.

It is about whether citizens, including clergy and elected representatives, may speak openly on matters of faith and conscience without fear of prosecution.

It is about whether it is illegal to say what you believe.

Our story shows how the process itself becomes the punishment. We have faced years of investigation, public scrutiny, and legal uncertainty. This creates a chilling effect, not just for Christians, but for everyone who holds views outside a narrow, state-approved consensus.

When the state controls which ideas and beliefs may be expressed, democracy becomes fragile.

Speech that is lawful today can become criminalized tomorrow. This should concern every person who values freedom.

My ordeal has been extremely difficult, but I have been supported by my faith and the thousands of expressions of support I’ve received from around the world, including many from the U.S. Congress.

I remain hopeful. I trust that freedom of expression can still be upheld. It is too important to lose.

My wish is simple: that Europe, and our democratic partners, remain places where every person can speak freely. I’m pleased with the good relations between the United States and Finland and hope that they will continue to strengthen.

Thank you for listening. Thank you for your commitment to freedom.