Censorship, Conspiracy, and Executive Overreach: The Newest Threat to Our Freedom of Speech

Photo Credit: SWinxy

Since assuming office, President Trump has dramatically upended the federal government to fulfill many of his campaign promises. He authorized Elon Musk to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to reduce government spending, initiated a campaign of mass deportation, and enacted major tariffs on important trade partners. But one of the major promises Trump made on the campaign was to uphold Americans' right to free speech. He issued an executive order to achieve that purpose, aptly named, “RESTORING FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ENDING FEDERAL CENSORSHIP.” In this order, President Trump asserts that the Biden administration has infringed on American citizens’ rights to their constitutionally protected freedom of speech, and has vowed to eliminate censorship efforts from the federal government. 

President Trump is a notable critic of student demonstrations on college campuses, and he has frozen or attempted to freeze federal funding for colleges that do not comply with his demands or outlined vision. His administration, in accordance with his promises for immigration, has been targeting international students that have vocally criticized his administration’s policies. He has also accused social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter of allegedly censoring conservative voices. Finally, he has also attempted to control the narrative of those that report on him; he tried and failed to ban the Associated Press from the White House press pool. President Trump is adamant that he has brought back free speech in America.  However, many of his current actions suggest otherwise.

Actions Restricting Free Speech on College Campuses

Criticism of on-campus demonstrations is nothing new. Richard Nixon famously referred to students protesting his administration’s actions in Southeast Asia as “bums.” But no president has ever taken direct action against protesters or their universities. President Trump’s actions are completely unprecedented. He has frozen $400 million in federal funding from Columbia University, alleging they allowed antisemitism to proliferate on campus and created an unsafe learning environment. Students at Columbia urged the university to divest from funding Israel and its war in Gaza, and resulted in an intense encampment protest, known as the Gaza Solidarity Encampment, which drew national attention. The protest lasted for about two weeks before ultimately being abruptly halted by the NYPD, ending with the arrest of 109 students. But a university task force found that Jewish students at Columbia felt unsafe and their complaints went unheard by administrators. But Columbia has promised to work with the Trump administration to regain their funding and to combat antisemitism on its campus, drawing praise from Linda McMahon, Secretary of Education, who reported being “very pleased” with Columbia’s concessions. In addition to Columbia, Trump has frozen federal funding to multiple elite universities: Cornell, Princeton, Northwestern, Brown, and the University of Pennsylvania. He is currently in litigation with Harvard because he is attempting to freeze $2 billion-the largest amount of federal funding yet. Harvard has been vocal in its opposition to Trump’s funding freezes, and has refused to concede to demands made by the administration, which includes restricting activism on campus and suspending Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs.  

In addition to punishing universities, President Trump has also attempted to deport international students that publicly protest or criticize his administration’s actions. Mahmoud Khalil, a graduate student at Columbia, led the infamous Columbia encampment protest against Israel's war in Gaza. He is a permanent legal resident-he holds a green card, and he is married to an American citizen. He was arrested and taken into custody on March 8th, 2025, and sent to a detention facility in Louisiana. The Department Homeland Security (DHS) argues that his role as a negotiator in student protests at Columbia undermines U.S. foreign policy interests. Another student being held in a detention center is Rumeysa Ozturk, a graduate student at Tufts University that wrote an article that criticized her university's response to student protestors. She has a valid student visa, but no charges were filed against her. DHS claims that Ozturk engaged in pro-Hamas activities. In addition to Khalil and Oxturk, over 1,000 students face deportation after their student visas or legal status were revoked. To carry out these deportations, the administration attempted to invoke Section 237 (a)(4)(C) of the Immigration Act of 1952, which authorizes the secretary of state to expel foreigners that threaten U.S. foreign policy interests. The legality of this move is questionable, and many students argue that the government cannot justify revoking their legal status, and that it is an attempt to chill free speech. 

Actions Affecting Free Speech on Social Media Platforms

Prior to his reelection, President Trump heavily criticized platforms like Meta and X (formerly named Twitter), accusing them of censorship. Trump had posted incendiary statements on X (formerly known as Twitter) that resulted in his supporters storming the U.S. Capitol Building on January 6, 2020. Twitter was concerned that he would continue to encourage violence from his supporters, and banned him from the platform, and other companies followed suit. Trump then sued Twitter, alleging they had engaged in censorship. But a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, citing a “failure to plausibly state a claim”. Facebook also took steps to ban Trump for his actions of January 6th, which angered Trump. He also filed a lawsuit against Meta, Facebook’s parent company, which the company agreed to settle for $25 million. In anticipation of the upcoming election, President Trump threatened to jail Meta’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg if he “interfered”. Zuckerberg, in response to threats, has agreed to end fact-checking on Facebook and Meta’s other platforms. This is creating a dangerous environment, as it encourages the proliferation of misinformation. 

Actions Affecting Freedom of the Press

Finally, President Trump has also sought to clamp down on journalists and the media pool as a whole. He regularly labels critical platforms as “fake news,” and has attempted to control direct media to the White House. He even attempted to ban the Associated Press (AP) from the White House altogether, although he was forced to relent after a judge dissolved his ban. Trump has also targeted networks; he has singled out CBS in particular. He alleges in an ongoing lawsuit that CBS favorably edited a 60 minutes interview to benefit his opponent Kamala Harris, which CBS denies. But Trump is simultaneously directing the FCC to investigate the 60 Minutes for “news distortion.” Trump cannot directly revoke CBS’s broadcasting license, but an FCC investigation can halt mergers or acquisitions, and Paramount (CBS’s parent company) is currently attempting to merge with Skydance Media. The combined pressure of a lawsuit and a FCC investigation has pressured Paramount to consider settling with Trump. However, conceding to Trump may not result in a resolution to conflict-it may only encourage him, and demonstrate that he can continue to extend his authority and influence over the media without facing any obstacles. 

President Trump’s efforts to restrict free speech combined with his effort to bring the entire executive branch under his control indicate a troubling trend towards an authoritarian style of government. In a brief published by the University of Chicago, suppression of the press is cited as a condition in democratic backsliding and a factor of an authoritarian government. While past presidents have not been afraid to challenge the boundaries of free speech, President Trump is especially zealous in attacking our right to free speech, particularly those that criticize him. His actions taken against students, universities, and journalists demonstrate that he does not intend to end federal censorship–he intends to use it to the fullest extent possible. 
I find all of these actions to be a horrifying and blatant attempt to stifle our constitutional right to free speech. President Trump has demonstrated a clear willingness to attack his critics with the power of his office-from DOGE firings to attempted deportations of student activists. But in my opinion, quelling criticism is not his ultimate goal. His intention is to inspire fear, in the hopes that he will be allowed to continue his appalling behavior without opposition. By attempting to deport international students that protest his policies, he effectively silences international students that publicly speak out against him. Pressuring social media companies to eliminate fact-checking ensures that he can continue to circulate misinformation to the general public. And pressuring critical newspapers and media outlets virtually eliminates accountability and civilian oversight of his administration. I urge the president to reevaluate his commitment to protecting free speech–I find it lacking.