The EU’s Digital Services Act gives European officials the power to “suppress speech globally with which they disagree”, a US congressional report has claimed.
The allegation is made in an interim report published by the House Judiciary Committee, which accuses the EU of compelling American social media companies to censor political speech, memes, satire and humour worldwide.
“The DSA infringes on American online speech,” the report states.
The report, entitled “The foreign censorship threat: How the European Union’s Digital Services Act compels global censorship and infringes on American free speech”, alleges that EU officials are using the DSA – a sweeping content regulation law passed in 2022 – to pressure large platforms like X, YouTube and Facebook into adopting speech restrictions that go beyond European borders.
“The DSA is the EU’s comprehensive digital censorship law,” it reads.
According to the document, internal company records and subpoenaed communications show that European regulators have “privately” encouraged platforms to update their global content moderation policies in line with the EU’s definition of disinformation and hate speech.
One example cited was a 2025 workshop hosted by Commission officials, in which participants were asked how they would address “memes that may be used to spread hate speech or discriminatory ideologies.”
Another exercise involved classifying a post that read “we need to take back our country” as “illegal hate speech” under the DSA.
“This content is protected under any reasonable free speech legal regime,” the report reads.
“But in Europe, and potentially around the world, social media platforms must censor political opinions, humour, and satire that runs afoul of the EU’s censorship regime.”
The report also criticises the system of “certified third-party arbitrators” introduced by the Act to resolve moderation disputes.
While these arbitrators must be independent of the platform in question, the Committee noted that they are not required to be independent of the EU regulators who approve them.
“This incentivises arbitrators to heed regulators’ censorship demands,” it said.
The document goes on to state that many of the civil society organisations (CSOs) involved in the moderation process are “left-wing and pro-censorship”, with some urging platforms to remove “everything that can be considered as hateful and harmful”, even if not illegal.
The report concludes that the DSA is being used to undermine First Amendment rights in the US, describing the law as “a powerful censorship tool” camouflaged as a safety regulation.
“With its broad definitions and heavy mandates, the DSA creates a regulatory framework in which online platforms…must either adopt the Commission’s approach to speech, by censoring any content the Commission or its related bodies believe should be censored, or face significant fines,” it reads.
The publication follows a recent visit to Europe by Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, who met with Irish and EU officials to raise concerns about the law.
“It seems like just two layers of bureaucracy,” Jordan said during the trip.
“We’re trying to get our arms around…who’s really in charge?”
As reported by Politico last week, the Committee’s investigation into the DSA began in August 2024, when then-Commissioner Thierry Breton threatened regulatory retaliation against X for broadcasting a live interview with Donald Trump.
Breton resigned shortly after the incident. His successor, Henna Virkkunen, is described in the report as a strong supporter of the DSA’s provisions.
The Act is enforced in Ireland by the Coimisiún na Meán, which has the power to fine noncompliant companies up to 6% of global revenue, or temporarily shut down platforms in “extraordinary circumstances”.
Under the law, Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) must partner with approved “trusted flaggers” to identify and remove illegal content.
The system has previously drawn criticism from US officials, who argue that American companies headquartered in Ireland are being disproportionately affected by Brussels’ policies.
During the same trip to Dublin, Antitrust Subcommittee Chair Scott Fitzgerald said Ireland’s role in tech regulation gave the issue “a different light” compared to other member states.
“There are certainly people within each of these countries…that are raising [concerns],” added Jordan.
“So I think that hopefully we’ll have…some opportunities to work together to really have a positive impact.”
The publication of the US report follows recent statements by Irish lawmakers supporting a similar approach to technology regulation within Europe.
Earlier this year, Fianna Fáil TD Malcolm Byrne, who chairs the Oireachtas Committee on Artificial Intelligence, said that Ireland should seek to use AI to promote EU values “globally”.
“I am conscious of and totally agree that we need to infuse AI with European values,” he said.
“Our challenge is that Europe has moved in the regulatory space, but there is a fear concerning regulation in the US and China going in a different direction.”