On the heels of a recent report documenting Biden-Harris Administration support for censorship in Brazil, Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), the Chair of the House Global Human Rights Subcommittee, has introduced legislation to stop U.S. taxpayer funds from flowing to progressive non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that are promoting Brazil’s escalating crackdown on free speech.

            “The Biden-Harris Administration has weaponized U.S. foreign assistance programs and other means to promote censorship in Brazil and crack down on free speech that would be protected under our U.S. Constitution here at home,” said Rep. Smith, a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who chaired a congressional hearing in May examining Brazil’s extensive human rights abuses.

            “Free speech is fundamental to democracy,” said Smith, an international human rights leader. “It is unconscionable that the United States is using taxpayer dollars to promote this type of censorship which completely contradicts our entire American constitutional tradition.”

            Cosponsored by Reps. Jim Jordan and Maria Salazar, Smith’s legislation—the No Funding or Enforcement of Censorship Abroad Act (HR 9850)—would cut off U.S. foreign assistance to any entities that promote censorship and prohibit U.S. law enforcement agencies from cooperating with foreign countries to promote censorship against speech that would otherwise be protected if the speaker was located in the United States.

            “The House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government have uncovered how the FBI under the Biden-Harris Administration facilitated a foreign government’s censorship requests against Americans,” said Rep. Jordan. “This bill is critical in stopping foreign government censors from using the DOJ or the FBI to silence disfavored views.”

            “The United States must defend Elon Musk from the attacks of Alexandre de Moraes and the other forces of socialism in Brazil,” said Rep. Salazar. “The United States needs to uphold the principles of its constitution and stand by its citizens whenever they face censorship abroad.”

            Among its provisions, the No Funding or Enforcement of Censorship Abroad Act would:

            · Prohibit foreign assistance to entities that promote censorship of speech that would be protected speech in the United States;

            · Prohibit foreign assistance to entities that back the Brazilian government’s censorship directives to U.S. internet companies;

            · Prohibit U.S. law enforcement cooperation with foreign countries to “cause, facilitate, or promote online censorship” of political speech; and

            · Prohibit U.S. law enforcement cooperation with Brazilian government censorship directives against internet companies headquartered in the United States.

            Smith’s bill—which was informed in part by testimony at the congressional hearing he chaired in May—has already received support from some of the many victims of Brazil’s censorship regime.

            “Freedom of speech is not a partisan issue; it is the cornerstone of a free and open democratic society,” said Rumble Chairman and CEO Chris Pavlovski. “Unfortunately, free speech is under attack globally. I know that personally because Rumble, which is headquartered in Florida, pulled its services from Brazil following censorship demands from the Brazilian courts. People around the world look to America to protect free speech, and this bill is a step in the right direction.”

            “The fact that Brazil’s U.S. government-funded censorship has affected Americans directly is itself reason to be alarmed, particularly since Brazil risks being a test case for what censorship advocates want to do globally,” said Michael Shellenberger, the CBR Chair of Politics, Censorship, and Free Speech at the University of Austin and founder and president of Civilization Works. “Perhaps most alarming of all is that the Brazilian government is not just censoring constitutionally-permitted speech, it’s trying to ban independent journalists and politicians from all major social media platforms, which constitutes election interference.”

            Earlier this year, Smith hosted a news conference on Capitol Hill where Brazilians who had been de-platformed from social media by order of Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes shared personal testimonies of government persecution. Smith said he asked de Moraes about those allegations—and additional ones raised during his May hearing—in a letter dated June 21, 2024, but has yet to hear back from the Supreme Court Justice.

            Smith, a longtime outspoken advocate in Congress for victims of human rights violations, has long had grave concerns about human rights in Brazil under President Lula’s rule. In 2009, Smith traveled to Brazil to successfully fight for the return of a New Jersey child who had been abducted and held there for five years. As part of that effort, Smith authored the Sean and David Goldman International Child Abduction Prevention and Return Act, the landmark law that provides the U.S. State Department with a variety of tools to pressure foreign governments and bring home American children abducted overseas.

###