Cookie Control

This site uses cookies to store information on your computer.

Some cookies on this site are essential, and the site won't work as expected without them. These cookies are set when you submit a form, login or interact with the site by doing something that goes beyond clicking on simple links.

We also use some non-essential cookies to anonymously track visitors or enhance your experience of the site. If you're not happy with this, we won't set these cookies but some nice features of the site may be unavailable.

By using our site you accept the terms of our Privacy Policy.

(One cookie will be set to store your preference)
(Ticking this sets a cookie to hide this popup if you then hit close. This will not store any personal information)

In Testimony, RCFP Attorney Highlights Government Threats To Free Speech

"Gabe Rottman, RCFP’s vice president of policy, testified on Tuesday during a U.S. Senate hearing on “The Censorship Industrial Complex.”"

"An attorney from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press highlighted several government threats to free speech, including the recent White House ban on The Associated Press, while testifying on Tuesday before a U.S. Senate subcommittee about “The Censorship-Industrial Complex.”

The hearing, held by the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, was prompted in part by concerns over allegations that the Biden administration coerced social media platforms to take down posts as part of government efforts to help platforms moderate misinformation related to COVID-19, election fraud, and other issues.

In testimony before the subcommittee, Reporters Committee Vice President of Policy Gabe Rottman addressed the complications involved when interpreting interactions between the government and private speakers — including the news media — and clarified when they cross a constitutional line.

“Ultimately what matters is which party — the government or the private speaker — makes the decision” to withhold information from the public, Rottman testified. “If the former, the government violates the First Amendment by using its power to inject itself into public debate. If the latter, that interaction can be a valuable addition to public debate.”"

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press had the story March 25, 2025.

Source: RCFP, 03/27/2025