The US State Department has imposed visa bans on five prominent European figures, including a former European Union commissioner and four others, accusing them of orchestrating efforts to compel American social media platforms into censoring users and their viewpoints. Secretary of State Marco Rubio asserted that these individuals "have led organised efforts to coerce American platforms to censor, demonetise, and suppress American viewpoints they oppose," describing them as "radical activists and weaponised NGOs" who have advanced "censorship crackdowns by foreign states—in each case targeting American speakers and American companies." Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers identified the targeted individuals, accusing them of "fomenting censorship of American speech."

The most high-profile individual targeted is Thierry Breton, a French former business executive who served as European Commissioner for the Internal Market from 2019 to 2024. Rogers labeled Breton as the "mastermind" behind the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA), a comprehensive EU digital sphere rulebook that mandates content moderation and other standards for major social media platforms operating in Europe. The visa bans also extend to Anna-Lena von Hodenberg and Josephine Ballon of the German nonprofit HateAid, Clare Melford, co-founder of the UK-based Global Disinformation Index (GDI), and Imran Ahmed, the British chief executive of the US-based Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).

The US government's justification for these actions stems from its "America First foreign policy" stance, which rejects "violations of American sovereignty" and "extraterritorial overreach by foreign censors targeting American speech." Rogers specifically accused the GDI of leveraging "US taxpayer money to exhort censorship and blacklisting of American speech and press." The State Department reiterated its readiness to expand the list of sanctioned foreign actors if current efforts are not reversed. This aligns with a broader sentiment among US conservatives who view European digital regulations as a weapon of censorship against right-wing voices.

A pivotal point of contention was a letter Breton sent to X owner Elon Musk in August 2024, prior to an interview Musk planned with then-US presidential candidate Donald Trump. Rogers accused Breton of "ominously reminded Musk of X's legal obligations and ongoing 'formal proceedings' for alleged noncompliance with 'illegal content' and 'disinformation' requirements under the DSA." Additionally, US Vice President JD Vance criticized European censorship efforts in a February speech at the Munich Security Conference, claiming leaders had "threatened and bullied social media companies to censor so-called misinformation," citing the COVID-19 lab leak theory as an example.

The DSA and the UK's Online Safety Act (OSA) are core to this dispute. These legislations require social media firms to protect users, ensure transparency in content moderation, provide data access for researchers, and tackle illegal content like hate speech and child sexual abuse material, under threat of substantial fines. From the European perspective, these acts are democratically adopted measures to create a safer online environment and ensure that what is illegal offline is also illegal online. However, US Republicans, particularly those aligned with the Trump administration, interpret these regulations as attempts to suppress American free speech and target US tech giants.

European leaders have vehemently condemned the US visa bans. French President Emmanuel Macron described the measures as "intimidation and coercion aimed at undermining European digital sovereignty," emphasizing that EU digital regulations were adopted through a "democratic and sovereign process" and apply only within Europe. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot asserted that Europe "cannot let the rules governing their digital space be imposed by others upon them." Thierry Breton, in response, questioned: "Is McCarthy's witch hunt back?" and reminded that the DSA was unanimously voted for by 90% of the European Parliament and all 27 member states, adding: "To our American friends: 'Censorship isn't where you think it is.'"

The targeted nonprofits have also rejected Washington's claims, with a GDI spokesperson calling the sanctions "an authoritarian attack on free speech and an egregious act of government censorship." HateAid's CEOs viewed it as an "act of repression by a government that is increasingly disregarding the rule of law and trying to silence its critics by any means necessary." The European Commission previously dismissed US censorship allegations as "nonsense" and "completely unfounded" and has now requested clarifications from the US, stating it will "respond swiftly and decisively to defend our regulatory autonomy against unjustified measures."

Enforcement actions under these European laws have already stirred controversy. The European Commission recently fined Elon Musk's X €120 million (£105 million) for breaching DSA rules related to transparency in advertising and verification methods, deeming its blue tick system "deceptive." Musk, a self-proclaimed "free speech absolutist," previously launched a lawsuit against the CCDH, which was dismissed by a judge who said the challenge was "about punishing the defendants for their speech." Similarly, the UK's Ofcom, overseeing the OSA, fined the online forum 4chan £20,000 for non-compliance, leading 4chan to sue Ofcom in the US, alleging a violation of Americans' free speech rights.

This dispute highlights a growing ideological and geopolitical friction between the US and Europe over digital governance. US Under Secretary Sarah Rogers previously stated that applying foreign laws extraterritorially to American platforms, users, and political issues is a "red line." US legislative efforts, such as the GRANITE Act currently under consideration, aim to allow American individuals and companies to sue foreign governments or regulators and potentially render foreign fines, like those from Ofcom, unenforceable. This ongoing battle signals a significant theatre of confrontation as digital technologies become central to wielding global power.

Despite US pressure, European leaders and institutions remain defiant. The German justice ministry expressed "support and solidarity" with HateAid, calling the bans "unacceptable" and stressing that rules for the digital space in Germany and Europe are not decided in Washington. French Socialist MEP Raphaël Glucksmann challenged Rubio, stating: "We are not a colony of the United States. We are Europeans, we must defend our laws, our principles, our interests." The German Journalists’ Association further denounced the bans as "censorship in its purest form," typically seen only in autocratic regimes. These strong condemnations underscore Europe's firm resolve to uphold its regulatory autonomy and digital sovereignty against what it perceives as external intimidation.