US Launches Lobbying Campaign Against EU’s Digital Services Act

• The Trump administration has instructed US diplomats in Europe to lobby against the EU’s Digital Services Act, citing concerns about free speech and costs to US tech companies.

A Diplomatic Push Against EU Regulation

The Trump administration has initiated a diplomatic campaign in Europe aimed at undermining the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA). According to an internal State Department cable signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, American diplomats have been tasked with lobbying EU governments to either amend or repeal the law. The directive argues that the DSA’s efforts to combat misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech place “undue” restrictions on freedom of expression. This action marks a significant escalation in the administration’s efforts to influence European tech policy.

The DSA is a landmark piece of EU legislation designed to create a safer and fairer online environment. It requires major tech platforms to take more responsibility for tackling illegal content, including hate speech and child sexual abuse material. Washington’s opposition, however, frames these measures as censorship, particularly of conservative voices. This stance aligns with one of the Trump administration’s key themes, with officials like Vice President JD Vance having previously accused European leaders of “censoring” Americans.

The cable, labeled an “action request,” provides specific talking points and suggestions for how the law could be changed. It directs diplomats to build support among host governments and other stakeholders for its position. The document also instructs them to investigate any claims of censorship, with a focus on incidents affecting US citizens and companies. This includes cases related to online suspensions, arrests, or court proceedings.

The Free Speech and Financial Debate

The administration’s campaign frames itself as a defense of America’s free-speech tradition, a policy that has already strained transatlantic relations. This was highlighted earlier this year when Vice President Vance accused European nations of backsliding on democracy and censoring groups like Germany’s right-wing AfD party. During that trip, Vance met with AfD leaders, a group classified as a suspected extremist organization by Germany’s intelligence service. This policy is a continuation of the administration’s claims that platforms suppressed free speech during the Biden era.

A key part of the lobbying effort focuses on the financial burden the DSA places on US tech companies. The State Department cable mentions the costs associated with compliance as a significant concern. Tech giants like Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, have also publicly argued that the DSA amounts to censorship on their platforms. The directive urges diplomats to advocate for narrower definitions of “illegal content” and to reduce fines for non-compliance with content restrictions, which could alleviate some of these financial pressures.

The directive also takes aim at the Code of Conduct on Disinformation, a framework under the DSA. The State Department claims this code sets “overly broad controls” that undermine freedom of expression. US diplomats are instructed to push for the removal or amendment of this framework. This includes advocating against relying on “trusted flaggers,” which are entities designated by national authorities to report illegal content to platforms, a system the administration appears to view as an additional layer of control.

Unwavering EU Stance and Broader Context

Despite the US pressure, EU officials have remained firm on their position. In March, EU tech and antitrust chiefs reiterated to US lawmakers that the new regulations are not specifically targeted at American companies but are designed to keep digital markets open and fair. A Commission spokesperson, Thomas Regnier, has also stated that the DSA is not on the table for any trade negotiations with the US and will not be changed. This suggests that the American lobbying campaign may face considerable resistance.

The US Supreme Court’s ruling last year, which found the Biden administration’s contacts with social media companies did not violate free speech protections, provides an interesting counterpoint to the current administration’s claims. While the Trump administration frames the DSA as a free speech issue, a key aspect of the law is its focus on consumer safety and tackling illegal content like child sexual abuse material, a point often highlighted by EU officials. These differing priorities highlight the fundamental philosophical divide between the two sides.

In a related move, Secretary of State Rubio had previously threatened visa bans for foreign officials who “censor” the speech of Americans, including on social media. This policy, which could target foreign officials who regulate US tech companies, provides further context for the administration’s aggressive approach. This escalation shows a willingness to use diplomatic and economic tools to protect what it sees as American free speech principles and the interests of its tech companies abroad.