1 February 2026
The US Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and close aide to President Trump, Sarah Rogers, has accused Sir Keir Starmer’s government of holding “telegraphed authoritarian intentions” in its approach to free speech.
Ms Rogers did not hold back during an interview with The Sun’s Editor-at-Large, Harry Cole. She told viewers: “Just because we have a transnational internet now, doesn’t mean that Britain, for the first time in 250 years, gets to tell Americans what to think and say.” She went on to add that “the Labour Party has not distinguished itself with advocacy for free speech or sanity on migration”.
The Online Safety Act sits at the heart of an escalating censorship dispute between the UK and the US, with senior figures within the Trump administration, including Vice President JD Vance, raising concerns directly with Keir Starmer in the Oval Office at the start of last year.
When the Online Safety Act was first introduced to Parliament, it was framed as domestic legislation designed to protect children from online harms. In reality, it has — inevitably — expanded far beyond its original remit and now threatens the constitutional free speech rights of US citizens.
Ofcom, the Act’s regulator, has demonstrated concerning extraterritorial ambitions that pose a direct threat to the First Amendment rights of US citizens and businesses. It is also set to become the subject of numerous legal challenges in US courts, as seen in disputes involving platforms such as 4chan and Kiwi Farms. Last year, Ofcom fined the messaging forum 4chan £20,000 for failing to provide information about the risk of illegal content on its platform. In the same enforcement action, the regulator stated it would impose an additional £100 fine per day for 60 days, or until the information was provided. In response, the platform sued the regulator in the US, where Ofcom has now claimed “sovereign immunity”.
Ms Rogers has said that Congress will introduce legislation to shield US companies and citizens from the reach of the Online Safety Act and its enforcement arm, Ofcom, which is demanding that US tech firms remove content accessible in the UK. Ms Rogers and other White House figures have described the Act as a censorship regime that is “anathema” to the First Amendment.
Preston Byrne recently wrote a compelling piece in The Spectator in support of such a move, describing it as a “legislative weapon”. Byrne has advocated for Congress to pass the GRANITE Act — the Guaranteeing Rights Against Novel International Tyranny and Extortion Act — which would function as both “shield and sword”. He argues that the legislation would achieve two key objectives: first, it would strip foreign censors of the ability to rely on claims of sovereign immunity; second, it would impose such severe financial consequences that future attempts to infringe the free speech rights of Americans would be deterred.
Further concern has been sparked in the US following the passage of an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill in the House of Lords on Monday, which would allow the government to ban access to VPNs for under-18s. While it is not thought the government will approve this amendment, it is a clear sign of the concerning trajectory the UK is on. This development has set alarm bells ringing within the US State Department, with a senior source telling The Telegraph: “The first step towards any tyrannical censorship regime is cutting off private access to the internet that the government cannot directly control in the name of ‘safety’, preventing the free exchange of ideas.” Other officials have gone so far as to claim that online censorship in the UK now rivals that of Iran.
Frustration and concern in the US over the state of free speech in the UK — and its impact on American citizens — continue to grow. The Starmer government’s apparent disdain for freedom of speech is now damaging the UK’s long-standing special relationship with its closest ally.
