Photo: Alamy
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi explained the difference this week between “free speech” and “hate speech,” igniting a debate among conservatives about how far the government should go in protecting free expression.
In the wake of the assassination of Turning Point USA President Charlie Kirk, Bondi released a statement on X, addressing the rise of violent and radical behavior of the far left, and how it links to the free speech versus hate speech debate.
Bondi wrote on Tuesday, “Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime. For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over.”
She added, “You cannot call for someone’s murder. You cannot swat a Member of Congress. You cannot dox a conservative family and think it will be brushed off as ‘free speech.’ These acts are punishable crimes, and every single threat will be met with the full force of the law. Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence.”
Her statement came after comments she made on “The Katie Miller Podcast,” in which she initially ignited this debate by remarking, “There’s free speech, and then there’s hate speech. And there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society. We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.”
This follows a theme from the Trump administration that has arisen in the wake of Kirk’s horrific assassination: a vow to crack down on far-left radical organizations funding or promoting violence.
“With God as my witness, we are going to use every resource at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, and throughout this government, to identify, dismantle, and destroy these networks…we will do it in Charlie’s name,” said White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, while speaking to Vice President J.D. Vance during a memorial episode of “The Charlie Kirk Show.”
Some have criticized Bondi’s comments as going too far. Fox News Chief Political Analyst Brit Hume, for example, fired off on Monday, “Someone needs to explain to Ms. Bondi that so-called ‘hate speech,’ repulsive though it may be, is protected by the First Amendment. She should know this.”
However, Bondi’s later X statement seemed to address critics’ concerns: “Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence. It is clear this violent rhetoric is designed to silence others from voicing conservative ideals.”
Additionally, conservative commentator and podcast host Megyn Kelly observed, “Hate speech is not prosecutable in America (which is good). Pam Bondi knows this. I am guessing, given the statements by Stephen Miller yesterday about targeting violent cells, she means those who actually plan violence, which would not be about the speech but the conspiracy.”