With the arrival of Saint Patrick’s Day, our nation’s close affinity to Ireland was on full display in the White House as President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance hosted Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin.
We are two countries joined by blood and tradition. Of course, there are tensions over trade conflicts with the European Union and Ireland, which quickly came to the surface in the meeting. In the end, however, we are likely to resolve those trade problems. The fact is that we need each other, both economically and culturally.
Yet, there is one chasm between the two countries that not only remains wide but is widening: the gap between how each country handles free speech. And Martin would much prefer to talk about Irish socks than Irish censorship.
Ironically, before he became associated with green beer and leprechauns, Saint Patrick was a symbol of freedom of speech. Although there is no evidence beyond pious legend that he chased snakes out of Ireland (there likely never were snakes in Ireland), he did chase slavery and human sacrifice out of the country, despite the initial unpopularity of his reforms. A former slave himself, St. Patrick’s public statements against slavery, paganism and longstanding traditions were viewed as harmful to social tranquility and harmony.
Does that sound familiar?
Today, Ireland, like many of our European allies, is shredding free speech with laws criminalizing viewpoints and regulating speech by its content. “Irish eyes [may be] smiling,” but Irish tongues are increasingly silent in the face of government investigations and prosecutions. The growing conflict between the U.S. and the Irish could not be more telling.
Irish immigrants, including some of my relatives, came to this country to live freely, and many soon became lawyers fighting for individual rights. Just before Martin’s arrival in Washington, his government was hammering Elon Musk and conservative sites in the latest crackdown on free speech. The most recent flashpoint was a small pro-life platform called Gript, a rallying point for many in his Catholic country who oppose abortion. The government demanded that X turn over Gript’s data on sources and users.
An Irish court on June 13, 2024, sought the data on private accounts as well as IP addresses and messages linked to Gript coverage of the April protests against Ireland’s housing of documented migrants. The violence in those protests gave the Irish government another justification to curtail free speech.
In yet another defining moment for Musk on free speech, he not only resisted but informed Irish citizens what the government was doing. That transparency and opposition sent the Irish government into a full-on rage.
After the arrest of 34 people and extensive property damage in the anti-immigration protests, the government moved to expand on its already draconian anti-free-speech laws. A new bill was introduced criminalizing “preparing or possessing material likely to incite violence or hatred against persons on account of their protected characteristics.” That includes any material concerning national or ethnic origin, as well as protected characteristics including “transgender and a gender other than those of male and female.”
The bill included crimes relating to “xenophobia” and can be committed merely by the “public dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material.”
Then-Prime Minister Leo Varadkar declared his intent to “modernize laws against hatred” by criminalizing speech that his government decides is “incitement.” He stated an intention to not only stop those engaged in violence but those who say things that might arouse their anger.
The powerful Irish Green Party was all-in with censorship and speech prosecutions. As Green Party Sen. Pauline O’Reilly admitted, “We are restricting freedom, but we’re doing it for the common good.”
It is a familiar pattern. In my book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss how “rage rhetoric” is often exploited by governments as an excuse for “state rage.” Citing false claims made in the protests, the government declared a new round of crackdowns on viewpoints it considers harmful or misleading.
Ireland’s national police, known as the Garda Síochána, ordered X to produce extensive data linked to Gript Media’s official X account, @griptmedia. It wanted to see not just information identifying users but also private messages and addresses that would have revealed the media outlet’s confidential sources and communications.
Ireland reflects the free fall of free speech across Europe. Germany, France and the United Kingdom have followed the same path of the ever-expanding regulation and criminalization of free speech, including statements deemed by the government to be “disinformation.”
This week, I will be speaking at the World Forum in Berlin, Germany, on the anti-free speech movement, led in no small part by the European Union. Anti-free speech groups and figures are also gathering, particularly after Vance’s historic speech recently in Munich criticizing our allies for their abandonment of free speech.
After years of largely unimpeded growth, the anti-free speech movement is facing its first serious impediments following Musk’s purchase of Twitter and the new American defense of free speech.
Musk has borne the brunt of the counter campaign. By breaking away from the other social media companies, Musk’s X defied the EU and its censor. He was threatened not only with financial ruin but also with actual arrest unless he restored the censorship system.
The left in the U.S. and Europe targeted his companies and his revenue. Recently, Tesla dealerships and charging stations have been vandalized and even set on fire.
In Ireland, Martin denounced Musk and objected to “the degree to which, under the cover of free speech, it essentially is allowing … unacceptable material in terms of hate, bile and attacks, and so on.” Again raising the Dublin riots, he said changes have to be made to protect “democracy and society.” In other words, free speech is endangering society.
This has been the siren’s call of censorship throughout history.
Despite this history, there is reason to be optimistic. The Irish government was forced to withdraw its draconian legislation due to a groundswell of opposition from young voters, including within Martin’s party.
Free Speech Ireland celebrated the defeat by the two main parties, which “miscalculated in what they think young people want.” It turns out that it is still difficult to get a free people to give up freedom.
The defeat of the Irish legislation was perhaps only a temporary victory. But for the free speech community, it was a rare, positive moment in dark times. It raised the possibility, on this Saint Patrick’s Day, that we just might be able to chase censorship, like slavery, from the Emerald Isle.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
