The Trump administration has ignited a major diplomatic and ideological dispute by imposing visa-related sanctions on two prominent British figures leading the fight against online disinformation. The move, announced by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, has been condemned by a senior Labour MP as an attack on free speech and has drawn sharp criticism from European governments.
Sanctions Target Key Campaigners
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the sanctions this week against five Europeans, including British nationals Imran Ahmed and Clare Melford. Ahmed is the chief executive of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), while Melford heads the Global Disinformation Index (GDI). Both organisations have been vocal critics of harmful online content and have previously clashed with Elon Musk, the owner of X and a former adviser to President Donald Trump.
The US State Department accused the sanctioned individuals of leading "organised efforts to coerce American platforms to censor, demonetise and suppress American viewpoints they oppose." Sarah Rogers, a department official, stated on X: "Our message is clear: if you spend your career fomenting censorship of American speech, you’re unwelcome on American soil."
UK and European Backlash
The sanctions prompted an immediate and forceful response from Chi Onwurah, the Labour MP who chairs Parliament's technology select committee. Onwurah accused the Trump administration of undermining the very free speech it claims to protect. "Banning people because you disagree with what they say undermines the free speech the administration claims to seek," she said on Wednesday.
She highlighted that Imran Ahmed had given evidence to her committee's inquiry, advocating for greater social media regulation. "Banning him won’t shut down the debate," Onwurah added, "too many people are being harmed by the spread of digital hate."
The reaction from the British government was notably muted. A spokesperson said that while every country sets its own visa rules, the UK supports "laws and institutions which are working to keep the internet free from the most harmful content." This contrasted sharply with the stance of European allies.
French President Emmanuel Macron called the measures "intimidation and coercion aimed at undermining European digital sovereignty." The European Commission issued a statement saying it "strongly condemns" the actions. A spokesperson for the GDI labelled the sanctions "an authoritarian attack on free speech and an egregious act of government censorship."
Broader Context and Future Implications
The sanctions are seen as the opening salvo in a wider conflict over tech regulation between the US administration and Europe. The CCDH and GDI have been thorns in the side of X owner Elon Musk. Musk previously tried to sue the CCDH and has called for the GDI to be shut down. The EU's Digital Services Act, which fined X €120 million, has also been a point of contention.
Campaigners warn that the UK could be next in the firing line, particularly because of its new Online Safety Act (OSA). Ava Lee, of People Vs Big Tech, stated: "With the Online Safety Act, the UK is likely to be next in the firing line." US officials have already met with UK regulator Ofcom to express concerns that the OSA could infringe on free speech.
Crossbench peer Beeban Kidron, a leading online safety campaigner, called Rubio's comments an "outrage," adding: "The US tech sector, backed by the US administration, is attempting to undermine European laws and values." The episode sets the stage for continued transatlantic tension over who controls the digital public square.
