Here’s a question someone in Washington needs to answer: Who is slowing down President Trump’s investigation into Europe?
Because the president gave a pretty clear order. And yet, more than a month later, nothing has happened.
We’re watching the same game play out with Canada right now.
According to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, the United States and Canada had found a path toward a trade deal. Then Canadian negotiators suddenly backed away from the near-final agreement because they “wanted more.”
Now Canada is imposing retaliatory tariffs and blaming the United States for the breakdown.
Sound familiar?
For far too long, some of America’s closest allies have operated under the assumption that they can take advantage of the United States economically and Washington will eventually shrug its shoulders and move on.
President Trump was elected in part to end exactly that kind of thinking.
And while everyone is focused on Canada, we cannot forget what Europe has been doing to some of America’s most successful companies.
For years, European officials have buried American technology companies under investigations, regulations, and massive fines. They have forced U.S. companies to redesign products, demanded access to proprietary technology, and extracted billions of dollars in penalties.
And let’s be clear about something: These are some of the most innovative and successful companies America has ever produced.
Europe has struggled to produce technology companies that can compete with them. So instead of beating American companies in the marketplace, European regulators increasingly appear determined to regulate them into submission.
President Trump saw what was happening and decided America wasn&#8217;t going to sit there and take it anymore.
On July 24, he announced that the United States would “immediately” open a Section 301 investigation into Europe&#8217;s treatment of American technology companies after the European Commission fined Google another $1 billion for alleged violations of its Digital Markets Act.
There was nothing ambiguous about the word immediately.
Yet more than a month later, the investigation still hasn&#8217;t begun.
So what happened?
It certainly doesn&#8217;t appear to be opposition from American technology companies.
Google publicly thanked the Trump administration for its engagement after the investigation was announced. Amazon, Apple, Meta, X, and other American companies have spent years fighting Europe&#8217;s attempts to regulate and penalize them.
And it doesn&#8217;t appear to be President Trump&#8217;s top trade official.
Ambassador Greer has been remarkably direct about what Europe is doing. He has described its actions as “de facto forced technology transfer and intellectual property theft” backed by “unreasonable financial penalties.”
Think about this: Greer says Europe&#8217;s fines against Google alone add up to more than 2% of the European Union&#8217;s entire budget.
Google is effectively contributing more through fines than many EU member countries.
That should get everyone&#8217;s attention.
So if the president wants the investigation, his trade representative has publicly condemned Europe&#8217;s behavior, and America&#8217;s technology companies have spent years fighting these policies, who exactly is stopping this from moving forward?
Is it holdover career bureaucrats slow-walking another part of President Trump&#8217;s America First agenda?
Is someone inside the government more worried about offending Brussels than carrying out the president&#8217;s directive?
Or is this simply another example of a massive federal bureaucracy incapable of moving with the urgency demanded by the person elected to run the executive branch?
Whatever the answer is, the result is exactly what Europe wants.
The European Commission hasn&#8217;t withdrawn its Google fine.
It hasn&#8217;t eased its regulations targeting American technology companies.
It hasn&#8217;t stopped its investigations.
It hasn&#8217;t offered meaningful concessions.
Why would it?
So far, there have been no formal consequences.
Every additional week of delay tells European officials that maybe they can simply wait President Trump out.
Meanwhile, Europe is moving forward with its so-called “Tech Sovereignty Package,” putting up to €10 billion in public funding and awarding another €180 million in sovereign-cloud contracts as part of an effort explicitly designed to reduce reliance on “foreign” technology providers.
Let&#8217;s translate that from bureaucratic language into English.
They want to reduce their dependence on American technology companies while simultaneously using European regulatory power against those same American companies.
That&#8217;s not free-market competition.
If Europe wants its technology companies to compete with ours, great.
Build better products.
Innovate.
Compete.
Win customers.
But don&#8217;t use government regulators and billions of dollars in public money to tilt the playing field against American companies and then act shocked when an American president finally says enough.
That is why President Trump&#8217;s Section 301 investigation matters.
This isn&#8217;t simply about Google.
It isn&#8217;t simply about one European fine.
It&#8217;s about whether the United States is finally willing to defend American companies when foreign governments use regulatory power to put them at a disadvantage.
And there is an even bigger message being sent here.
Canada is watching.
China is watching.
Every major American trading partner is watching.
They are watching to see whether President Trump&#8217;s threats have consequences and whether his administration will actually follow through when another country pushes the United States around.
President Trump has made his position clear.
His chief trade official has made his position clear.
Now somebody needs to explain why the president&#8217;s directive still hasn&#8217;t been carried out.
Because every day Washington waits is another gift to Brussels — and another signal to the rest of the world that they can test America&#8217;s resolve without paying a price.
The president said immediately.
It&#8217;s already past time for Washington to start acting like it.
***
Ben Ferguson is a nationally syndicated talk radio host and author. He is the host of &#8220;The Ben Ferguson Podcast&#8221; and the co-host of &#8220;Verdict with Ted Cruz,&#8221; one of the top-ranked political podcasts in the country.

U.S. President Donald Trump Visits Scotland For Golfing Getaway

Who Is Slowing Down President Trump’s Investigation Into Europe?

canada

donald trump

european union

google

section 301 investigation

trade policy

Engaged in a tit-for-tat trade war with the United States, Canada is pursuing stronger ties with Europe and Asia in an effort to ease its trade woes.
Canada and the United States have each imposed 50% tariffs on certain imports from the other country, and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is looking for avenues to get relief from the tariffs. Committed to rallying the world’s “middle powers,” Carney has said that he is “not looking to become a member” of the European Union but is seeking a “unique alliance.” 
On Wednesday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen offered Carney a solution. 
Von der Leyen <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2026/09/16/canada-builds-ties-europe-asia-turning-away-us-amid-trade-war/">offered</a> to make Canada the first “associate member” of the European Union. Von der Leyen framed the proposal as an effort to build “common strength” rather than a move “against anyone else.” Becoming a full E.U. member typically takes years and requires extensive negotiations and legal changes, but it remains unclear what Canada would have to do, or how long it would take, to become an “associate member.” If confirmed, the status would be the first of its kind. 
President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/trump-warns-eu-tariffs-over-canadas-potential-associate-membership-calls-it-2026-09-17/">responded</a> to the proposal Wednesday night after disembarking from Air Force One for a campaign event in North Carolina. 
“I think it’s laughable,” Trump said. “If they do that, if I think it’s at all a hostile act, I will put very serious tariffs or stop trading with Europe on many things.” The president added that his next move would depend on what he believes Europe and Canada intend to accomplish.
“If it’s a good intention, that’s fine,” he continued. “If it’s a bad intention, we’ll put very heavy tariffs on Europe.”
One E.U. diplomat was reportedly caught off guard by the proposal, saying that “nobody really knows what it means.” Another diplomat added that some E.U. members were concerned von der Leyen “is overpromising and won’t be able to deliver.” Yet another diplomat called the invitation an “unfortunate proposal, which has never been discussed with Member States.”
At the same time, Canada is also pursuing new trade negotiations with China, a country that praised Canada for walking away from negotiations with the United States. Chinese state media even <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/china-media-hails-canadas-chinese-style-tariff-retaliation">praised</a> Canada’s efforts as “Chinese-style” tariff retaliation. In September, the countries re-engaged in military talks for the <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-china-military-cooperation-9.7337345">first</a> time in eight years. The conversations had been put on pause after Beijing kept two Canadians in detention in 2018. Officials met in early September in Canada “in support of ongoing military-to-military communications at the functional level.” 
Shortly after the talks between China and Canada, the Canadian government added new tariffs on steel, dairy, and agricultural equipment. The Trump administration also imposed bans on certain Canadian alcohol and “other products that were subject to the 50% tariffs imposed.” The new import bans are set to <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2026/09/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-responds-to-canadas-retaliation/">take effect</a> at the end of this month.

CANADA-G7-SUMMIT-DIPLOMACY

Canada Schemes Up Plot To Get Around Trump’s Tariffs

mark carney

tariffs

ursula von der leyen

President Donald Trump has promised an end to the 15% tariff on Irish whiskey.
Trump was attending the Amgen Irish Open at his Trump International Golf Links resort in Doonbeg, County Clare — and he took the microphone at the contest&#8217;s close to present a trophy to Irish golfer Shane Lowry, who won the tournament.
&#8220;This is an honor. We&#8217;re so proud. The whole Doonbeg — and frankly, Ireland itself has been so incredible, so inviting, and we&#8217;re very honored presenting you with a great course, it&#8217;s been great,&#8221; Trump said, but then he pivoted.
&#8220;I want to mention one thing. Taoiseach and I talked about it, and Shane talked about it, and everybody&#8217;s been bugging me, they&#8217;re saying, &#8216;Would you do me a favor? It&#8217;s so unfair what&#8217;s going on. Could you possibly take the tariffs off of Irish whisky?'&#8221;
The crowd roared with laughter, and Trump smiled before he continued, &#8220;And I said on behalf of the United States of America, I am going to take the tariffs off of Irish whiskey.&#8221;
The crowd cheered so loud then that Trump was completely drowned out as he finished his sentence.
&#8220;Thank you,&#8221; Trump said, turning to Lowry and adding, &#8220;Shane, great job.&#8221;
Trump was not clear about when the <a href="https://commission.europa.eu/topics/trade/eu-us-trade-deal_en">tariffs</a> — currently set at 15% as part of the flat tariffs against many European Union exports — would be lifted. Those tariffs took effect on July 1, 2026.
<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-irish-whiskey-e2eaed86e5c13013af92c102ad082b76?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+New+Content+%28Feed%29&amp;utm_medium=trueAnthem&amp;utm_source=twitter">Previously</a> the president lifted tariffs on whiskey made in the United Kingdom — including Scotland and Northern Ireland — claiming that he&#8217;d done so in response to a request in late April from Britain&#8217;s King Charles III and Queen Camilla, who had been visiting the White House at the time.
&#8220;The King and Queen got me to do something that nobody else was able to do, without hardly even asking!&#8221; Trump said at the time.
The zero-tariff policy on Scotch whisky took effect July 24, a change the Scotch Whisky Association welcomed as &#8220;welcome news for business on both sides of the Atlantic.&#8221;

U.S. President Donald Trump Visits Ireland – Day Two Doonbeg

Crowd Roars As Trump Promises To End Whiskey Tariff

ireland

whiskey

world

In the year 2000, a Chinese businesswoman arrived in the United Kingdom. She was six months pregnant. Given that China at the time enacted its brutal one-child policy, and she already had one child, she knew she had to leave China. Canny woman that she clearly was, Mrs. Man Lavette Chen made sure she was in Belfast, in the province of Northern Ireland. On September 16, she gave birth to a daughter, Catherine.
Chen had not chosen the Northern Irish capital for its weather. And it might seem that Britain was an odd place to go to give birth, because Belfast is British, and Britain had scrapped birthright citizenship in 1983.
But under the 1998 Good Friday Agreement peace deal to end the Troubles, anyone born anywhere on the island of Ireland was Irish. And Irish meant European. And a European baby, Chen’s lawyers argued, needed her mother beside her, so the family could settle in Cardiff, the capital of Wales (in Britain and, at the time, also in the European Union, and under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice). Nobody has ever gone to such lengths to live in Wales since maybe Edward I, in the 1280s.
The European Court of Justice agreed with Chen, but four months earlier the Irish had voted, 79% to 21, to take birthright citizenship out of their constitution. After complaints from the Dublin maternity hospitals about foreign women flying in to give birth, a national referendum voted overwhelmingly to end the right. That is how the last birthright in the European Union died: one anchor baby, one flight to Belfast, one referendum, done.
Britain has already devalued citizenship by reducing it to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-britain-turned-citizenship-into-identity-by-paperwork">paperwork</a>. But those Europeans who ever had birthright citizenship, including Britain, who manage to get almost everything about immigration policy wrong, have all scrapped the concept. Most never allowed it in the first place. The United States has long been a major outlier in this respect, now even more so with the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Barbara.
In fact, only about 30 countries worldwide now grant citizenship to anyone born on their soil, almost all of them in the Americas. This perhaps hints at the historic reasons behind such a constitutional divergence; the New World was filled by immigration, whereas the Old World might have an older constitutional sense of citizenship as tied to blood.
Britain settled this nearly 50 years ago. In the British Nationality Act of 1981, Margaret Thatcher legislated that a baby is British only if a parent was British or “settled” in the country. Anyone else’s child has to earn it by living in the United Kingdom for 10 years. This became an acute problem in the decades after World War II, as the collapse of our Empire caused confusion about who still counted as part of what had been a sprawling imperial family. Waves of immigration never seen before caused huge tensions on the British mainland. Even though they have, to pardon the awkward turn of phrase, now been whitewashed from contemporary leftist history, which tells of Britain welcoming sons of the Empire, Left-wing governments of the mid-20th century did what they could to prevent an influx from places like the Caribbean, India, and Pakistan.
What about the continentals? France passed a nationality law back in 1889. A child born in France to foreign parents becomes French at 18, provided he has lived there for five years since age 11. The recent tightening is another vestige of the Age of Empire. Mayotte is a French island off the east coast of Africa (think of it as like Hawaii, rather than Guam). It has the biggest maternity unit in France, but is mostly full of mothers who crossed illegally from neighboring Comoros. France restricted birthright citizenship there in 2018 and tightened it again last year: both parents now need a year’s legal residence. The far Right did none of this.
Germany had no right to citizenship for anyone not born to German parents until 2000, when some allowance was put in place. And in the Scandinavian countries, so often painted by the American Left as examples of socialist paradises, they are actively taking passports from those dual nationals who commit crimes, even if they were born there. This is going through the Swedish Parliament as we speak. The Danes have been doing it for many years already.
And down under, both Australia and New Zealand removed birthright citizenship to prevent the same phenomenon of abuse by overstayers and illegals. And in both cases, Left-wing governments instituted the changes. I don’t even need to tell you that these sorts of debates aren’t even needed in places like Japan or the UAE.
But in America, in 2023, 320,000 babies were born to mothers who were in the country illegally or on temporary visas. That was 9% of all births — adding an equivalent population of Pittsburgh each year.
This has become a full-scale industry. In 2019, federal prosecutors charged 19 people over “maternity hotels” around Los Angeles that sold Chinese clients a delivery for $40,000 to $80,000, on the promise of “the most attractive nationality.” The security threats, given the danger of the Chinese Communist Party to all that the West holds dear, are obvious.
Far be it from a Brit to tell Americans to change their constitution, in this year of all years. But it should help to illustrate what an outlier the U.S. (and Canada, bless ‘em) has become across the developed world. If you do attempt to change the rules around birthright citizenship, do not let any leftist tell you it is an unspeakable, far-Right evil policy. It would only be bringing you into line with all of Europe and most of the developed world.
***
James Price is a former Chief of Staff to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and a senior fellow at the Adam Smith Institute.

Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Policy Gets Supreme Court Hearing

Dismantling The Myth Of The ‘Far-Right’ Immigration Policy

birthright citizenship

immigration policy

opinion

trump v barbara

united kingdom

Thousands of migrants remain in Ceuta, Spain, on Monday, with hundreds <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/world/europe/spains-ceuta-overwhelmed-thousands-remain-migrant-border-rush-rcna590549">camping</a> on a beach after last week’s border rush from Morocco overwhelmed the city.
Spanish officials say about 69,500 people have gone back to Morocco in the last four days. That is higher than the first estimates of roughly 50,000 who crossed into Ceuta on Thursday, according to NBC News. The death toll stands at 83 as of Monday.
Many of the migrants who left the city said they turned back after shops closed and left them without food. The migrants also said that they faced hostility from local residents.
Footage from El Trampolin beach shows dozens of migrants, most from south of the Sahara, lying on the sand. Some had wrapped themselves in towels to protect themselves from the wind as army and police vehicles moved along the road behind them.
Ceuta leader Juan Jesus Vivas told Telecinco that 3,000 to 5,000 migrants remain in the territory. He said both reception centers, one for adults and one for minors, had “collapsed.” Official Alberto Gaitan said the city is processing 862 migrant minors who have special legal protections against deportation.
The situation has sharpened tensions inside the European Union over border policy. Spain has accused some its neighbors of failing to help and only offering polarizing responses. Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares noted Monday that Spain had previously supported other E.U. countries during migration crises and now expected the same in return. 
Vivas, however, blamed Morocco. He told El Pais there was a widespread perception in Ceuta that Morocco had allowed, if not orchestrated, the crisis. 
“Morocco has shown us that it isn’t reliable. There’s no alternative but to put in place whatever means are necessary to ensure it cannot do this again,” Vivas said.
Morocco’s Interior Ministry on Sunday blamed the surge on misinformation circulating on social media, human trafficking networks, and a misinterpretation of a Spanish court ruling that bans the immediate deportation of migrants intercepted at sea. That explanation also aligned with Madrid’s official position.
Morocco’s Interior Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment, NBC News reported. In its Sunday statement, it said the country remains “committed to strengthening international cooperation and coordination in combating irregular migration and human trafficking.”
Spain’s Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska told reporters on Saturday that the foreign intelligence agency CNI, which is controlled by the Defense Ministry, had not warned him of an imminent surge. El Pais reported Monday that the lack of warning created tensions between the two ministries. 
An Interior Ministry spokesman downplayed those reported tensions. Defense Minister Margarita Robles declined to say whether the CNI had any prior intelligence of the mass crossing, citing the secret nature of its work while praising the “exceptional” performance of Spanish security personnel.
President Donald <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-migrant-invasion-of-spanish-territory-will-be-a-midterm-talking-point">Trump</a> said Friday the Ceuta events would be a midterm talking point, describing them as looking “like an invasion of a country by hundreds of thousands of people” and warning the United States would face worse if Republicans don&#8217;t win upcoming elections. Vice President JD Vance called the images “an unfortunate reminder of the consequences of mass migration.” The State Department said the U.S. stands with the people of Spain against “this egregious violation of their sovereignty and human rights.”
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/france-puts-troops-on-border-with-spain-due-to-moroccan-invasion?author=Leona+Salinas&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=3&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=France+Puts+Troops+On+Border+With+Spain+Due+To+Moroccan+Invasion">France</a> also moved last week to reinforce its border with Spain, deploying mobile forces, aircraft, and drones in response to the same surge.

Spain says over 48,300 migrants have returned to Morocco from Ceuta

Even After Major Exodus, Thousands Of Migrant Invaders Still Overwhelm Spanish City

ceuta

migrant crisis

morocco

spain

At least 34 people died Thursday as nearly 50,000 illegal migrants invaded the Spanish territory of Ceuta from Morocco.
Many of the deaths were drownings as migrants attempted to swim into Ceuta. Others were killed when they were trampled as the swarm of people <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/07/31/world-news/at-least-18-migrants-die-trying-to-cross-morocco-spain-border-a-serious-humanitarian-crisis/">broke down</a> gates and overwhelmed Spanish border officials. Most of the migrants appear to be young men.
Leftist Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who recently paved the way for a million illegal migrants to obtain legal status, claimed he would end the chaos. 
“The Government of Spain is fully committed to providing an immediate response to the situation in Ceuta,” he said. “We are mobilizing all necessary resources, working with Moroccan and international authorities, and preparing the necessary measures to restore normalcy as soon as possible.”
Later on Friday, he added that the migrant flood &#8220;deserves our full reproach, our condemnation at the strongest possible level of rejection, condemnation, and consideration as deplorable.&#8221;
The military has been mobilized to respond to the massive influx of illegal migrants who were emboldened by a decision from Spain’s Supreme Court that migrants crossing by sea cannot be immediately deported.
As they pushed past border officials, migrants reportedly chanted “Bye Bye Morocco, hello Spain.” Almost 50,000 migrants entered Ceuta and they flooded the streets. One video shared online shows a man pooping in the streets. 
“Businesses closed. Shops shut because if you open a business, it gets overrun. … We’re scared. The streets are packed. There are no measures in place. It’s every man for himself. They’re not giving us any help,” one local restaurant owner <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/07/31/world-news/thousands-of-illegal-african-migrants-overrun-spanish-enclave-turn-streets-into-open-toilets-and-bathe-in-fountains-an-apocalypse/">said</a>. 
Another local described the event as an &#8220;apocalypse.&#8221; 
Migrant Ajoub el-Arrot <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/07/31/world/spain-ceuta-migrants-morocco">told</a> The New York Times he entered Ceuta looking for a job. 
“I don’t know why they let us through. Maybe they had some political reason,” he said. “They opened the border and let everyone go by.”
Another person told Reuters that he simply pushed past the police. 
“It was very tough,” Jadid Zacaria said. “The police tried to stop us. But our will and determination allowed us to come here.”
Santiago Abascal of the Right-wing Vox party said the influx was welcomed by Sánchez. 
“They’re not fleeing from war or poverty. It’s an invasion,” he said. “They are military-aged men invited by Pedro Sanchez’s corrupt government to storm our borders so they can roam Spain’s streets shouting ‘Viva Pedro Sanchez.’” 
In response to the videos coming from Ceuta, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said Italy is &#8220;prepared to intervene with extraordinary measures to defend the borders and the safety of citizens, including the suspension of the Schengen Area with Spain.&#8221; The Schengen Area is a zone that allows people to travel between 29 European countries without border checks.
“The images coming from Ceuta are striking and demonstrate, once again, that uncontrolled illegal immigration poses a concrete threat to the security of Europe&#8217;s borders.” she said. “On illegal immigration, we will not yield an inch: defending the borders, stopping human traffickers, and ensuring effective repatriations will continue to be the line of this Government.”
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called the situation in Ceuta “unacceptable.&#8221; 
“We cannot allow anyone to come to our Union without abiding by our rules,” she said. “Dangerous crossings must stop immediately. Smuggling networks must be dismantled. And returns must be swift, as our rules allow.”

MOROCCO-SPAIN-MIGRATION

Death Toll Grows After Tens Of Thousands Of Migrants Invade Spain

europe

Illegal Immigation

mass migration

Muslim Immigration

WASHINGTON— President Donald Trump threatened the European Union with &#8220;substantial&#8221; tariffs on Friday after regulators hit Google with another $1 billion antitrust fine, accusing Europe of treating the United States like its own &#8220;PIGGYBANK.&#8221;
Trump accused the EU of &#8220;taking direct aim at GREAT American Companies!&#8221;
&#8220;After having fined Apple, for no reason at all, 15 Billion Dollars, Meta, 3 Billion Dollars, Amazon 2.5 Billion Dollars, and many others, we have just been informed that Google, a truly advanced and amazing group, has been fined yet another 1 Billion Dollars, without explanation,&#8221; Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116976043318889040">posted</a> on Truth Social.
The latest penalty brings Google&#8217;s total EU fines to more than $18 billion, the president said.
&#8220;This illegal and highly discriminatory practice started at these high levels during the first year of the Sleepy Joe Biden Administration, but it’s not going to continue during the Trump Administration,&#8221; Trump said, adding: &#8220;The United States of America is not a &#8216;PIGGYBANK&#8217; for Europe, nor will we allow it to be!&#8221;
<div id="attachment_1143205" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-threatens-european-union-after-massive-fines-on-google/president-trump-hosts-2025-world-series-champions-los-angeles-dodgers" rel="attachment wp-att-1143205"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1143205" class="wp-image-1143205 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/07/GettyImages-2286736761-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/07/GettyImages-2286736761-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/07/GettyImages-2286736761-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/07/GettyImages-2286736761-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/07/GettyImages-2286736761.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" /></a>US President Donald Trump speaks in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, July 23, 2026. Photographer: Samuel Corum/Sipa/Bloomberg via Getty Images</div>
Trump warned that the EU&#8217;s actions would trigger a strong response from the United States.
&#8220;Please let this TRUTH serve to represent that we will immediately initiate a 301 Investigation into the practice of &#8216;ROBBING&#8217; American Companies and, in turn, the American Taxpayer,&#8221; Trump wrote. &#8220;The European Union will pay a very big price for this illegal and highly unethical conduct, which I have consistently warned them about.&#8221;
&#8220;The penalties will be entirely reversed and, we anticipate, a substantial TARIFF to be placed on them at the earliest possible moment,&#8221; he added. &#8220;Stay tuned!&#8221;
Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Wire.

All-In and Hill & Valley Forum Host “Winning The AI Race”

Trump Threatens European Union After Massive Fines On Google

amazon

apple

Executive

Global Politics

politics

People in Britain often say that the United States is much like the United Kingdom. Recent polling by Freshwater Strategy showed that the British public thinks that the U.K., as a country, would be the 7th richest U.S. state. The actual 7th richest state, North Dakota, boasts a GDP per capita of $102,000 compared to the U.K.’s $52,000.
Many Brits assume that in both economies most people are poor, while a small number of individuals accumulate vast wealth at the top. In this myth, the U.S. suffers from the same perceived problem as Britain of inequality without wider prosperity.
The uncomfortable reality, however, is that the average Brit is significantly poorer than most Americans.
By GDP per capita, parts of America that are routinely described as economically lagging outperform the British economy. Even Mississippi, often cited as the poorest state, has a GDP per capita of $54,000. That should be a sobering benchmark. This is not a story about inequality in Britain but about weak national wealth creation.
Britain retains the self-image of a rich country but its underlying performance tells a different story — one of high taxes, vast regulation, weak productivity growth, and poor incentives for entrepreneurs.
This reality has shaped the political climate. Between 2008 and the E.U. referendum in 2016, living standards stalled. The Brexit vote was, in part, a collective response to that stagnation and a demand for a different economic trajectory. Leaving the E.U. was never a growth strategy in itself but rather an opportunity to pursue one.
In this respect, Brexit was — and still is — a fork in the road. Britain has greater autonomy over its regulatory, tax, and trade policy. The question is whether that autonomy is used to drive growth or not. My forthcoming story of the Brexit referendum, <a href="https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/ten-years-on">Ten Years On</a>, chronicles the campaign and what has happened since.
<div id="attachment_1087613" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1087613" class="size-large wp-image-1087613" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760-864x576.jpg" alt="Pedestrians walk across the Millennium Bridge above the River Thames in central London on April 16, 2026. Britain's economy grew much stronger than expected in February, prior to the start of the Middle East war, official data showed on April 16 ahead of a likely hit from the US-Iran conflict. (Photo by Henry NICHOLLS / AFP via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/04/GettyImages-2271018760.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Henry NICHOLLS / AFP via Getty Images</div>
In some areas, Britain has benefited from its post-Brexit freedoms. Examples of this range from tech, where being outside the E.U.’s regulatory regime has allowed the U.K. to be more nimble, to healthcare, where we can now approve new drugs far faster. Overall, however, we have not made as much of these freedoms as we should have. 
Critics blame Brexit for Britain’s economic stagnation, but much of it stems from longer-term policies that have held back prosperity.
The preconditions for entrepreneurship are not new, nor are they particularly complicated. I recently co-authored a book with Dr. Arthur B. Laffer and others called <a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Prosperity-Through-Growth-Standards-Disinformation-ebook/dp/B0FP3WPW6Z/ref=sr_1_1?crid=RCU8GVEQ5895&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Qi7pfmaBWI3SOK7ThVB1F6kdMIM62-7Uwj6luPyjVkDKKI54VPK7IVlT1dVJfFQu.OQ-kNm7gXECxObiXcJrN6HqpotDFqUx2dulfB9kD06w&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=prosperity+through+growth">Prosperity Through Growth: Boosting Living Standards in an Age of Autocracy and AI.</a> We argue that growth requires low tax rates, low government spending, sound money, smart regulation, and free trade.
Ultimately, prosperity is generated not redistributed. The focus of economic policy should be incentivizing entrepreneurship rather than redistribution. Without economic growth, debates about inequality become zero-sum.
Britain’s problem isn’t that wealth is unevenly distributed. It is that the overall economic pie has grown too slowly for too long. And that pie is being cut into ever more pieces with the explosion of migration to the U.K.
This explains a paradox that defines modern Britain. All the fundamentals are there, but the incentives often discourage entrepreneurship. Inequality becomes more visible not because of a few too rich people but because the middle is comparatively squeezed.
Americans, on the other hand, enjoy higher median incomes. Take plumbers, for example, who earn $62,000 on average in America, compared to $43,000 in Britain. As President Kennedy once said, &#8220;A rising tide lifts all boats.&#8221;
The danger is that the debate remains focused on distribution rather than growth. Framing Britain as a country with a few very rich people and many struggling households risks misdiagnosing the problem.
A more accurate diagnosis is that Britain is an underperforming advanced economy. It has the capabilities to be significantly more prosperous than it currently is, but has failed to convert those capabilities into sustained growth.
The implication is straightforward. If Britain wants to meaningfully raise living standards, it must prioritize policies that incentivize growth.
The European Union referendum result reflected a demand for change. Whether that demand ultimately leads to greater prosperity depends not on the act of leaving the E.U., but on what we do with the freedoms that followed. Ironically, when critics of Brexit cite studies suggesting that the U.K. economy would be 8% bigger had it stayed in the E.U., those studies assume Britain would have grown at the same rate as the United States in the period since 2016. 
I look forward to seeing the British people enjoy the same pro-growth policies and prosperity that Americans enjoy.
* * *
Matthew Elliott is President of the Jobs Foundation and is a member of the House of Lords. He was also the Chief Executive of Vote Leave.

TOPSHOT-RACING-ENG-ASCOT

Britain Could Be Richer. It Keeps Choosing Not To Be.

Brexit

economy

Great Britain

If one were to believe that the survival of the West is at a crucial inflection point, it makes sense that America — the lone superpower, as an enfeebled Britain limps along self-righteously — would shore up allies in the Old Country. One way to do that is to send the most powerful man in the world’s Number Two to both extend the hand of goodwill and rapport, and to absorb the inevitable criticisms that have been hurled by the Continental class regarding the potential partnership.
It tracks then that the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board <a href="https://archive.ph/5aOuP%23selection-569.0-572.0">cannot seem</a> to comprehend why Vice President JD Vance is currently touring Budapest. “The Orbán affinity seems to be a combination of Mr. Vance’s ideological conviction and domestic coalition maintenance,” the paper writes, adding that, “Mr. Vance is convinced Mr. Orbán is on the front line of the West’s culture wars.” Orbán is. And Vance’s Budapest visit is possibly one of his career&#8217;s most important tests.
Consider the VP’s own words. “Foreign influence is when other governments threaten, cajole, and try to use economic influence to tell you how to vote &#8230; That is fundamentally an assault on your sovereignty,” the VP said <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2041875731559440607">in an interview</a>. Furthermore, he added, in a speech, “We were birthed from this continent,” reinforcing the civilizational ties. The WSJ is baffled at that. “Mr. Vance trotted out the word ‘sovereignty’ repeatedly during Tuesday’s appearance in Budapest to inveigh against putative EU meddling in Hungarian affairs.”
The Hungarian election this year is important for two different reasons. The fact that the VP is flying to Budapest for a high-profile visit and speeches in Europe, as well as to Islamabad, for the peace negotiations with Iran, demonstrates which side won the ideological debate within the White House and to which direction the grand strategy of this country might lead. But there is another important factor.
Beyond rhetorical symbolism about “civilizational ties,” the question is strategic. Within the European Union, Hungary remains one of the rare few states still considered neutral by both the U.S. and Russia, thereby positioning itself as a neutral ground for diplomacy.
Furthermore, Budapest has prioritized de-escalation in Ukraine since 2022 and continues to simultaneously condemn the Russian invasion while arguing for negotiation, a traditional detached realist outlook shaped by Hungarian geography: Hungary borders Ukraine, and is concerned about ethnic Hungarians in the Transcarpathia region, and has taken in over a million Ukrainian refugees.
Budapest is also a pivot point for U.S. trade rivalry with the EU. The <a href="https://www.theamericanconservative.com/hungarys-foreign-minister-trump-is-ukraines-only-hope-for-peace/">Hungarian leadership consistently argued</a> that EU sanctions on Russia have had unintended consequences, including energy shortages, inflation, and industrial strain in Europe, while Russia has continued to benefit from high global energy prices. Orbán has likewise warned against accelerating Ukraine’s membership in NATO, a position that has gained some reflection in recent U.S. strategic thinking.
The <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-National-Security-Strategy.pdf">2025 U.S. National Security Strategy</a> clearly states that there must be a pause in NATO enlargement, there should be total “burden shifting” of conventional security to NATO, and that the EU shouldn’t fine American companies and trade through cynical legislation that also curtails free speech, such as the European <a href="https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-services-act">Digital Services Act</a>. There is only one country that is aligned with the U.S. on all those interests.
Hungary faces its own challenges and contradictions. Eventually, it will have to either acquiesce to broader European oversight or follow Britain out of the EU. Orbán has sought to reform the EU from within rather than leave it, but that play won’t succeed without the U.S. decisively winning the trade and free-speech wars with the EU. His government faces ongoing pressure from Brussels through legal challenges and financial penalties, but being within the EU gives it veto power over European decisions that might harm U.S. financial interests.
Hungary is also a testing ground and a source of inspiration for similar socio-political tendencies in countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, particularly in natalist policies, even if its model is difficult to replicate in larger and more diverse societies.
This is rooted in Hungary’s historical experience with external domination, against the Nazis and Soviets, which reinforces elite skepticism toward ceding total authority to Brussels. Continued electoral success for Orbán would sustain this fragile model but likely also intensify EU pressure and raise the risk of political and economic friction. A defeat, however, would probably lead to rapid alignment with mainstream EU trade and social policies, and would be detrimental to U.S. interests.
It cannot be expected of the WSJ Editorial Board to be historically minded, but during the presidency of Millard Fillmore, the Hungarian nationalist Lajos (Louis) Kossuth visited and gave a<a href="https://millercenter.org/president/fillmore/foreign-affairs"> joint address at the U.S. Congress</a>, the second such foreigner after Lafayette. He then proceeded to visit Ohio, then the largest Hungarian diaspora in the country, and gave a speech stating that the <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190414134246/https://ohiohistoryhost.org/ohiomemory/archives/3834">spirit of our age is democracy</a> opposed to imperialism. Whether he can pull the current Hungarian administration over the electoral line is a different question, but it is only fitting that a former senator of Ohio and the current vice president be visiting Europe and remind Europeans of that same sentiment, that sovereignty, free speech, and democracy are far more important than transnational imperialism.
***
Dr. Sumantra Maitra is a historian based in Virginia.

VP JD Vance And PM Viktor Orban Hold A Joint Rally In Budapest, 5 Days Before The Hungarian Election.

The WSJ Is Baffled By JD Vance’s U.S. Diplomacy In Hungary

foreign policy

Hungary

jd vance

Victor Orban

A European politician has been found guilty by Finland’s top court of “hate speech” for sharing her Christian views on marriage in a 2004 church pamphlet. 
The Supreme Court of Finland voted 3-2 on Thursday to find Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen guilty of “making and keeping available to the public a text that insults a group.” The “text” she was charged over was a pamphlet explaining the Bible’s position on marriage and sexual ethics, written with Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola. 
“I am shocked and profoundly disappointed that the court has failed to recognize my basic human right to freedom of expression,” Räsänen said Thursday. “I stand by the teachings of my Christian faith, and will continue to defend my and every person’s right to share their convictions in the public square.”
Räsänen’s case has drawn the attention of United States lawmakers, who have said it demonstrates the perilous status of free speech in Europe. Lower courts previously unanimously acquitted her in 2022 and 2023, before prosecutors appealed to the Supreme Court. 
The court said that the pair “made available to the public and kept available to the public opinions that insult homosexuals as a group on the basis of their sexual orientation.” 
The court ordered Räsänen to remove 11 statements from the 25-page pamphlet, saying they should be removed from “public access” and “destroyed.” Pohjola was also convicted alongside Räsänen for his role in distributing the pamphlet. Räsänen will be fined around $2079, and Pohjola will be fined $1270. The foundation that published the marriage pamphlet will be fined $5775. 
The high court did acquit her of sharing a Bible verse from the book of Romans detailing the Christian understanding of sexuality. 
Räsänen was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom International and criminal defense lawyer Matti Sankamo. 
“By convicting me for expressing beliefs in a different context, the court has drawn an unclear, and I believe, dangerous line. This creates uncertainty, not only for me, but for every citizen who wishes to express their beliefs, or even more concerning for anyone who has expressed their opinions in the past,” Räsänen said during a press conference after the verdict attended by The Daily Wire. 
Räsänen, a member of the Lutheran church and Finland’s former Ministry of the Interior, said she was considering an appeal to the European Union. 
“I am taking legal advice on a possible appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. This is not about my free speech alone, but that of every person in Finland,” she said. “A positive ruling would help to prevent other innocent people from experiencing the same ordeal for simply sharing their beliefs.”
Paul Coleman, a lawyer with Alliance Defending Freedom International, said the case showed the danger of how “vaguely worded and highly subjective hate speech laws can be interpreted and misinterpreted by anyone who looks at them.”
Räsänen said Thursday she has received thousands of messages from people around the world through the ordeal, which began over seven years ago, and said that “the process has not been in vain” and has given her an opportunity to share her faith with others. 
“I believe that this process has been in God&#8217;s hands, and even though I&#8217;m disappointed and even shocked about this conviction that I got today,” she said. “I believe that this is also in God&#8217;s hands, what happened. There is some purpose also for this situation where we are now. I trust in God.”

MixCollage-26-Mar-2026-09-50-AM-3986

A Politician Shared Traditional Christian Values. Now She Stands Convicted Of ‘Hate Speech.’

Politician Convicted Of 'Hate Speech' In Shocking Case Over Basic Christian Beliefs

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

christianity

finland

free speech

America&#8217;s allies are finally ready to step up to the plate after years of dithering on the Iranian threat.
Those allies are ready with all their combined strength: Germany, France, UK, Italy, the Netherlands, Canada, and Japan. They are firing on all cylinders with urgency, resolve, and action.
Yes, that&#8217;s right. Our allies, who have been reliant on our largesse and mutual defense for decades, finally announced that they are going to help us, their patron state, the United States — with a very strongly-worded letter.
Our allies are doing what they do best. They are saying things.
At some point, the questions have to be asked: Who are our true allies? Who is actually stepping up to the plate? Who is merely judging from the sidelines?
In lieu of any real world support, our valiant allies have now issued a strongly worded letter.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/bss-ep-2392-sub?elementPosition=1&amp;row=6&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-974957" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1024x171.webp" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1024x171.webp 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-300x50.webp 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-768x128.webp 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1536x256.webp 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-2048x341.webp 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
Here&#8217;s what the letter says:
<blockquote>We condemn in the strongest terms, recent attacks by Iran on unarmed commercial vessels in the Gulf, attacks on civilian infrastructure, including oil and gas installations, and the de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iranian forces. We express our deep concern about the escalating conflict.
We call on Iran to cease immediately its threats, laying of mines and drone and missile attacks and other attempts to block the strait to commercial shipping and to comply with U.N. Security Council Resolution 28-17. We call for an immediate comprehensive moratorium on attacks on civilian infrastructure, including oil and gas installations. We call on all states to respect international law and uphold the fundamental principles of international prosperity and security.</blockquote>
Whoa, dude. Harsh stuff.
Iran must be quaking in its boots. Our allies are saying things.
The Europeans, Japan? They&#8217;re expressing “deep concern.” Not “regular” concern. “Deep” concern. They are calling on Iran to do things and to stop being so mean.
But wait, isn&#8217;t there some sort of commitment to action in the letter?
The statement does say this: “We express our readiness to contribute to appropriate efforts to ensure a safe passage through the Strait. We welcome the commitment of nations who are engaging in preparatory planning.”
That sounds good, right? But what does “appropriate efforts” mean? Who decides what is “appropriate?”
According to <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/03/19/strait-hormuz-coalition-allies-statement-uk">Axios</a>, “On Thursday morning, NATO head Mark Rutte and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer spoke with French President Emmanuel Macron and convinced him to lift his opposition to the political statement of support, while leaving the discussion on the practical steps for later.”
Now, to be fair to Rutte, there&#8217;s not much he can do. He&#8217;s the head of NATO, but he can&#8217;t simply deploy force. He certainly recognizes the Iranian threat, and he would like to avoid alienating the United States.
He said, “We all agree, as we always did, that it was crucial for Iran not to get its hands on a nuclear capability, a ballistic missile capability. And what the U.S. is doing at the moment is degrading that capability of Iran. And I think that&#8217;s very important. This is important for European security, for the Middle East. It is vital for Israel itself.”
 The Japanese are also paying lip service here; the Japanese prime minister told President Trump, “I firmly believe that it is only you, Donald, who can achieve peace across the world,” adding they would “reach out to many of the partners in the international community, to achieve our objective together.”
So what are our allies actually committing to?
Nothing. This sort of stupidity is nothing new for our allies, who are quite fond of empty verbiage as a substitute for credible threat of force.
Go all the way back to 1919, when the covenant of the League of Nations was integrated into the Treaty of Versailles. That attempt to form a family of nations — while it was not a success — led to 1928, when 15 countries came together to sign what was called the Kellogg-Briand Pact.
It outlawed war.
Did you know that? That war was outlawed in 1928? The signatories included France, the US, UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Belgium, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Italy, and Japan. 47 more nations joined in as well.
And then, three years later, in 1931, Japan invaded Manchuria and nobody did anything. And by 1941, every single nation that had signed the treaty, with the exception of Ireland — which basically stayed out of the war and sided with Germany — was enmeshed in World War II.
Empty verbiage.
The same thing holds true today. For decades, our allies have pretended to oppose the Iranian terror regime while doing virtually nothing to hold them accountable. They&#8217;ve imposed some rather minor sanctions targeting specific officials, unless the United States has pushed them into broader sanctions.
We&#8217;ve had to do all the hard work, as per our usual arrangement.
So here&#8217;s the deal. If we&#8217;re going to do all the work and undertake all the sacrifice and spend the blood and treasure, then we ought to reap the benefit. 
There&#8217;s been a lot of talk about what the United States ought to do next with regard to Iran. The most obvious move, and one I&#8217;ve been advocating, is for the United States to seize Kharg Island. President Trump has been suggesting for a while that this may happen.
Nearly 90% of all Iranian oil passes through Kharg Island. The Iranians have already, in large part, shut the Strait of Hormuz. They&#8217;ve already upped the ante in terms of attacks on surrounding gas and oil facilities. So the United States doesn&#8217;t have tremendous downside here.
What&#8217;s Iran going to do, attack more oil facilities? We ought to seize control of the oil, and then we ought to let American companies keep pumping it, and then we ought to send it to its final destination, China. China would then know that we are in charge of the spigot; Iran&#8217;s terrorist government would be deprived of their monetary flow.
What about the Europeans?
If the price of oil rises, they can buy it from us, not the Iranians.
If they&#8217;re not going to join us as allies, they can pay our companies for the oil.

NATO Leaders Attend 2025 Summit In The Hague

Fake Allies And Backstabbers

Ben Shapiro

iran

japan

middle east

nato

strait of hormuz

When the European Union adopted the Digital Services Act (DSA), officials insisted that the sweeping regulation was necessary to tackle “illegal content,” “disinformation,” and other harmful online activity. The message was that responsible regulation would make the internet a safer place. The reality, however, is that the DSA grants the EU enormous <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-europe-plans-to-strangle-american-free-speech?author=Lorcan+Price&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=How+Europe+Plans+To+Strangle+American+Free+Speech">censorship powers</a> that endanger free speech in the digital public square, in Europe and across the world.
Now, for anyone wondering what kind of speech these powers might ultimately be used to suppress, the answer is becoming clearer. On March 5, the European Commission adopted its new <a href="https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/gender-equality/gender-equality-strategy_en">Gender Equality Strategy</a>. The document leaves no doubt about the EU’s highly ideological direction, which has positioned it to become the world’s online censor through the DSA.
In the strategy, the European Commission states plainly that the DSA “recognises gender-based violence as a systemic risk, which providers of very large online platforms… have to assess and mitigate”. But what exactly is “gender-based violence”? 
According to the Commission, “online violence” includes acts that cause “psychological” harm or “suffering to women”. What this means is that if the ideological NGOs tasked with patrolling online content under the DSA object to a social media post on the grounds that it is “likely” to cause “harm” to women, major online platforms like X and Meta would be pressured to remove it as “violence”.
The nebulous definition of “online violence” put forward by the new Gender Equality Strategy makes it little more than a vehicle for digital censorship. The strategy presents itself as a roadmap for advancing equality across Europe. Yet what it reveals is a metastatic, habitual tendency on the part of EU institutions to embed contested ideological positions into policy and then frame any dissent as a threat. 
One notable passage in the strategy frames opposition to gender ideology as dangerous, warning that “anti-gender narratives … threaten the EU’s democratic space”. The strategy explicitly identifies “<a href="https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/1f5fa936-9fba-4435-93f5-32fa220bac82_en?filename=gender-equality-strategy-2026-2030.pdf">LBTIQ+</a> women” as a protected group and links gender equality efforts with other EU initiatives focused on sexual orientation. It also adopts an “intersectional approach,” asserting that sex and gender intersect with multiple forms of discrimination and should therefore be addressed through overlapping identity-based policies.
The strategy explicitly supports so-called “sexual and reproductive health and rights,” referencing a recent pro-abortion European Citizens Initiative. This signals continued normalization and support for abortion access on the part of the EU, which it has no authority to promote.
In the strategy, the European Commission refers to the Neil Datta report <a href="https://www.epfweb.org/node/1144">&#8220;The Next Wave&#8221;</a> as a trustworthy study identifying “well-resourced global movements, and increasingly exploited through foreign information manipulation and interference”. But what this “report” does is identify <a href="https://www.epfweb.org/node/1152">pro-life NGOs</a> and research centers promoting biological reality as radical, anti-gender, conservative, and religious extremists.
It does not take much imagination to see how this framework could be deployed in the world of online censorship.
In place since February 2024, the DSA gives the European Commission unprecedented power over the world’s largest online platforms, requiring them to remove certain content and manage “systemic risks” on their services. When authorities view legitimate criticism of gender ideology as part of “anti-gender narratives” threatening democracy, the next evident step is censorship in the name of “content moderation”.
Consider the prosecution of Finnish Member of Parliament <a href="https://adfinternational.org/campaign/free-speech-on-trial">Päivi Räsänen</a> under Finland’s national “hate speech” law. With the legal support of ADF International, Räsänen, a medical doctor, grandmother, and parliamentarian since 1995, has spent more than six years defending herself against criminal charges for posting a Bible verse on Twitter in 2019. She posted the verse to support her Christian beliefs about marriage and sexuality. Despite being acquitted twice by Finnish courts, the state prosecution has relentlessly pursued the case, which now awaits a decision from Finland’s Supreme Court. Under the DSA, we should expect to see more aggressive censorship for the simple expression of traditional Christian views like Räsänen&#8217;s.
Of course, the EU can, and should, advance authentic policies to promote equality between the sexes. But this is not that. There is no doubt that the Gender Equality Strategy strengthens the censorship regime created by the DSA. Democratic societies depend on open debate to promote true equality, not the suppression of views that challenge elite orthodoxy.
Platforms that fail to comply with DSA censorship directives face enormous fines, as evidenced by the €120 million fine levied against X, an American platform, last December. Although the penalty was formally tied to procedural violations, the platform was targeted for its pro-free speech stance, which it is now <a href="https://adfinternational.org/news/x-challenges-e120m-fine-under-eu-censorship-law">appealing</a> before the Court of Justice of the EU.
Both in Europe and across the world, including in the United States, the DSA creates powerful incentives for platforms to remove lawful content subjectively deemed problematic or suffer the consequences, which can range from crippling fines to suspension of services.
Europe has long presented itself as a defender of fundamental rights and democratic values. Yet the trajectory of its speech policies increasingly points in the opposite direction. Make no mistake about it: the EU is coming for your free speech, regardless of where you live, and it’s taking no pains to hide the kind of speech it’s after.
* * *
Dr. Adina Portaru is senior counsel, Europe, for legal advocacy organization ADF International, which is supporting X’s legal challenge before the General Court of the EU.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Symbol of transgender and female and male gender symbols

The EU’s Censorship Regime Has A New Gender Strategy And It Threatens Free Speech Everywhere

The EU's Censorship Regime Has A New Gender Strategy And It Threatens Free Speech Everywhere

Gender

gender ideology

Menu