Pam Bondi Intensifies Stance on Hate Speech, Urges Employer Action After Charlie Kirk Assassination Comments
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi intensified her stance on hate speech, urging employers to remove individuals making abhorrent comments about Charlie Kirk's assassination, sparking renewed debate on First Amendment protections.
Pam Bondi vs. the First Amendment. Plus. . .
The Free Press
Bondi has limited ability to prosecute 'hate speech,' experts say
Washington Examiner
The Attorney General’s Attack on Free Speech
The Atlantic
Pam Bondi vs. the First Amendment
The Free Press
Subscribe to unlock this story
We really don't like cutting you off, but you've reached your monthly limit. At just $5/month, subscriptions are how we keep this project going. Start your free 7-day trial today!
Get StartedHave an account? Sign in
Overview
- U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced a potential Justice Department crackdown on hate speech, immediately drawing significant conservative backlash and public debate over First Amendment protections.
- Bondi later clarified the department would only target hate speech escalating into direct threats of violence, which is not protected by the First Amendment, aligning with Supreme Court precedent.
- Following abhorrent comments about Charlie Kirk's assassination, Pam Bondi suggested employers remove individuals making such remarks and vowed to target hate speech more directly.
- Conservative figures like Senator Ted Cruz and Charlie Kirk voiced strong opposition, arguing hate speech is fundamentally protected under the First Amendment, unless it incites imminent violence.
- FCC Chair Brendan Carr also opposed government intervention in online speech, advocating for individuals to manage their own social media content rather than relying on federal oversight.
Report issue
Read both sides in 5 minutes each day
Analysis
Center-leaning sources frame this story by strongly criticizing Attorney General Pam Bondi's understanding of the First Amendment regarding "hate speech." They portray her comments as legally incorrect and divisive, contrasting them with a "true-blue believer" like Charlie Kirk. The coverage emphasizes the absence of a "hate speech" exception, positioning Bondi's remarks as a "horrible disservice" and a source of "confusion" that requires correction.
"It’s also exceptionally divisive at a moment when unity is what our nation needs."
The Free Press"Bondi's statements on this have been very far from that."
Reason"Carr has previously suggested that the FCC might try to limit liability protection for social media platforms under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act."
Reason"Bondi should know, however, that hate speech is vigorously protected by the First Amendment, and as such, cannot be policed."
Reason"The most powerful law enforcement official in the country does not seem to appreciate what Kirk—and practically every account on X—understands."
The Free PressArticles (14)
Center (5)
FAQ
Pam Bondi urged employers to remove individuals making abhorrent comments about Charlie Kirk's assassination, emphasizing action against such hate speech.
She clarified that the Justice Department would only target hate speech that escalates into direct threats of violence, which is not protected by the First Amendment, consistent with Supreme Court precedent.
Conservative figures like Senator Ted Cruz and Charlie Kirk argued that hate speech is protected under the First Amendment unless it incites imminent violence, opposing increased government intervention.
FCC Chair Brendan Carr opposes government intervention in online speech and advocates for individuals managing their own social media content rather than relying on federal oversight.
History
- 2M11 articles
