The White House crackdown on political rhetoric following activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination has unveiled a deep rift among conservatives. Some have applauded the curbs on what they consider hate speech, while others warn that the administration has gone too far.
In the days since Kirk, 31, was shot on a college campus in Utah while engaging in civil discourse, President Donald Trump and top government officials have issued public threats and put left-leaning groups on notice for language deemed unacceptable after Kirk’s death.
Attorney General Pam Bondi promised to prosecute purveyors of hate speech, and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr threatened repercussions against broadcasters after a television host made remarks he found objectionable. Vice President J.D. Vance stated that those who celebrated Kirk’s killing should lose their jobs, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced penalties for foreign nationals and U.S. troops who did the same.
Sound like cancel culture? Republicans, who have long accused Democrats of trying to shut down public figures or entities they oppose, say this is different. They are branding these actions instead as a “culture of consequences.”
“They’re not losing their jobs to cancel culture, they’re losing them to Consequence Culture,” President Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., wrote on X.
However, many top conservatives object to the administration’s measures. Republicans ranging from former George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove to U.S. Senator Ted Cruz and conservative commentator Tucker Carlson have voiced concerns about using Kirk’s death as a pretext to go after political rivals or curb freedom of expression. They warn that such actions could set a dangerous precedent that might backfire when Democrats are in power.
“If the government gets in the business of saying: ‘We don’t like what you the media have said. We’re going to ban you from the airwaves if you don’t say what we like,’ that will end up bad for conservatives,” Cruz said on his Friday podcast. He called Carr’s threats to fine broadcasters or revoke their licenses over show content “dangerous as hell.”
Trump, who has largely stood by Bondi and Carr, declined to clarify the difference between cancel culture and consequence culture during a Friday press interaction, dismissing the question as a trick.
“I’m a very strong person for free speech,” he told reporters in the Oval Office, before complaining about persistent unfair media coverage.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich said Trump’s team, preparing an executive order on political violence in the wake of Kirk’s death, supported free speech unequivocally.
“People are free to exercise it. However, sometimes if you don’t have anything nice to say, then it’s best to not say anything at all. There are some people who would benefit from internalising that adage,” Budowich said in a text message.
First Amendment experts—who emphasize that the Constitution protects even hateful speech—expressed concern that free speech rights are at risk.
“Free speech is obviously under attack,” said Kevin Goldberg, vice president of Freedom Forum, an organization promoting First Amendment education. “The threatening statements made by current FCC Chairman Brendan Carr are evidence of a threat to the First Amendment.”
Carr took issue last week with comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s comments on his ABC late-night show. Kimmel accused Kirk supporters of trying to score political points over the activist’s death. The FCC Chair threatened “remedies,” and ABC subsequently pulled the program off the air, prompting protests and widespread criticism across the political spectrum.
“After years of complaining about cancel culture, the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn’t like,” former President Barack Obama wrote on X.
Republicans argue that Democrats have also targeted political discourse and the free press. Republican strategist Shermichael Singleton highlighted efforts by President Joe Biden’s administration to silence conservative views about COVID-19 on social media platforms—a case that reached the Supreme Court. He described it as an example of Democrats doing what they now criticize Republicans for.
“I just think it’s a bit hypocritical,” Singleton said.
Polling data from Reuters/Ipsos suggests that Democrats are growing increasingly cautious about their political speech. Some 41 percent of Democrats surveyed in August said they felt less free to speak their minds about politics, compared with 30 percent in August 2017—roughly the same point in the first Trump administration. By contrast, fewer Republicans—17 percent—felt the need to restrain themselves when discussing politics, down from 30 percent eight years earlier.
Yet, some Republicans dissent from the administration’s actions following Kirk’s death, particularly regarding Bondi’s comments about hate speech and her department’s suggestion that it might target Office Depot for refusing to print posters featuring Kirk’s image.
“Get rid of her. Today. This is insane,” right-wing podcaster Matt Walsh wrote on X about the attorney general. “Conservatives have fought for decades for the right to refuse service to anyone.”
Though Bondi partially backtracked, criticism came from high-profile conservative quarters. Carlson, a Trump confidant, cautioned against using Kirk’s death to justify restricting speech his supporters might consider hate speech.
“You hope that a year from now the turmoil we’re seeing in the aftermath of his murder won’t be leveraged to bring hate speech laws to this country,” Carlson said. “And trust me, if it is, if that does happen, there is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience.”
https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/corrected-charlie-kirks-death-ignites-free-speech-fire-storm-among-trump-supporters-1809460.html