2023: Schweikert Voted To Ban Federal Employees From Using Their Official Authority To Promote The Censorship Of Online Speech On Social Media Platforms. In March 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the Protecting Speech from Government Interference Act, which would "prohibit federal employees from using their official authority, whether on or off duty, to influence or promote the censorship of any private entity's lawful speech on online social media platforms, including if the employee is in any federal workplace, wearing an official uniform or insignia, or using a federal vehicle or federal information technology, such as email. It would state congressional policy that employees acting in their official capacity should not influence or promote such censorship; require all agencies to provide mandatory annual compliance training for employees; direct the Office of Special Counsel to investigate any allegations of censorship activities prohibited by the bill; and establish penalties for employees who violate the bill's provisions, including disciplinary actions and fines of up to $1,000, or up to $50,000 for certain senior officials. It would provide an exception to the prohibition for employees engaging in legitimate law enforcement activities against unlawful speech, provided that the employing agency submits a report to Congress and the Office of Special Counsel at least 72 hours prior to any censorship action detailing the action to be taken and the agency's legal authority to exercise the law enforcement function; but the reporting requirement would not apply to law enforcement activities relating to combating child exploitation and human or drug trafficking, and reports may be submitted within 72 hours after the action is taken in the case of actions to prevent the dissemination of classified national security information." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 219 to 206, thus the bill was sent to the Senate. [House Vote 141, 3/9/23; Congressional Quarterly, 3/9/23; Congressional Actions, H.R. 140]
The Bill Was Perceived To Hinder Governmental Efforts To Tackle Online Content That Is Perceived As Harmful. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill that senior House Republicans introduced this month to prohibit federal officials from pressuring social media companies to censor speech could hamstring government efforts to combat online content that's widely perceived as harmful, including threats to public safety." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/24/23]
The Bill Would Prohibit Federal Officials From Pressuring Online Social Media Platforms To Censor Speech. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill that senior House Republicans introduced this month to prohibit federal officials from pressuring social media companies to censor speech could hamstring government efforts to combat online content that's widely perceived as harmful, including threats to public safety." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/24/23]
The Bill Would Prohibit Officials From Using Their Authority Or Influence To Promote For The Removal Of Online Content. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Republicans say the bill (HR 140) is designed to protect free speech on social media, but language directing officials not to use their authority or influence to 'promote' or 'advocate' the removal of content is raising questions about how those terms would be defined and whether public officials might themselves be muzzled." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/24/23]
The Bill Could Interpret Federal Warnings About Online Russian Disinformation, Health Disinformation, And Public Safety As "Pressuring" Social Media Platforms To Remove Such Content. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Federal warnings about online Russian disinformation, health problems that result from online behavior, and public safety could, given the reach of federal officials, be interpreted as pressuring the platforms to remove that content." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/24/23]
According To Congressman James Comer (R), The Bill Sought To Stop The Biden Administration From Coercing Social Media Platforms To Censor Certain Viewpoints And News. According to Congressional Quarterly, "James R. Comer, R-Ky., who leads the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, is the bill sponsor, reintroducing a measure he first offered in the last Congress. He said in a statement that it's meant to stop the Biden administration from 'bullying social media companies to censor certain views and news.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 1/24/23]
Legal Experts Argued That The Bill Could Be Used To Prevent Federal Officials From Notifying Social Media Outlets About Potentially Harmful Content. According to Congressional Quarterly, "But legal experts said the bill language could be construed to prevent federal officials from even notifying social media companies about potentially harmful content." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/24/23]
The Bill Would Impose Fines Up To $50,000 On Certain Senior Officials Who Violate The Online Censorship Ban. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill would levy fines as high as $50,000 on certain senior officials who violate the measure's restrictions." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/14/23]