US Executive Order Targets State AI Regulations & Canada Removes Religious Exemption from Hate Speech Laws | The Free Flow 12/18/25
Hong Kong activist Jimmy Lai found guilty on national security and sedition charges, U.S. executive order limits state AI regulatory powers, Reddit sues Australia over social media ban, and more.
Editors’ Note: Please be aware that The Free Flow newsletter will not be published for the next two weeks (December 25 and January 1) due to the upcoming holidays. It will return on Thursday, January 8.
This Week At A Glance 🔎
— 🇨🇳 Hong Kong Activist Jimmy Lai Found Guilty on National Security and Sedition Charges
— 🇺🇲 Executive Order Limits State AI Regulatory Powers
— 🇦🇺 Reddit Sues Australia Over Social Media Ban
— 🇨🇦 Canadian MPs Vote to Remove Religious Exemption from Hate Speech Laws
— 🇬🇧 London and Manchester Police Will Make Arrests for ‘Intifada’ Chants and Placards
First of All 🇺🇲
» President Trump Sues BBC for $10 Billion for Defamation
President Trump has filed a lawsuit seeking $10 billion in damages against the BBC, alleging that the broadcaster’s editing of his January 6, 2021, speech was defamatory and accusing it of deceptive and unfair trade practices.
Background:
The edited speech appeared in a documentary called “Trump: A Second Chance?” and spliced together three quotes from two portions of the speech, delivered almost an hour apart, into what appeared to be a single quote where Trump urged supporters to march with him and “fight like hell.”
The edit excluded a quote from Trump that said he wanted protesters to demonstrate peacefully.
Trump threatened legal action against the broadcaster last month, as detailed in a previous Free Flow, which triggered the resignations of the BBC’s top executive and its head of news.
The lawsuit, filed in Florida, could face challenges given that the documentary was not shown in the U.S. and the deadline to bring the case in British courts expired over a year ago.
BBC Response:
On October 24, the BBC issued a correction on its website that said;
“We accept that our edit unintentionally created the impression that we were showing a single continuous section of the speech, rather than excerpts from different points in the speech, and that this gave the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.”
Lawyers for the BBC added that the broadcaster’s chair, Samir Shah, separately sent a personal apology to the White House.
In a letter to Trump’s legal team, however, BBC lawyers said they “strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim.”
Lawyers said that because the episode was not distributed to its U.S. channels, was restricted to UK viewers on BBC iPlayer, and did not harm Trump, as he was re-elected after, it weakens the defamation case.
It also claims the edit was not made with malice, was never meant to be considered in isolation apart from the hour-long program, and remains an opinion on a matter of public concern, which is protected under U.S. defamation laws.
The Digital Age 🤖
» U.S. Executive Order Limits State AI Regulatory Powers
President Trump has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to challenge state AI regulations and advance a “minimally intrusive national standard.”
Background:
In July, the U.S. Senate voted to remove a 10-year moratorium on enforcing state AI regulations from the budget bill before it passed.
Despite the President’s suggestion, lawmakers declined to include an AI moratorium in the National Defense Authorization Act.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, all 50 states introduced AI legislation, and 38 states adopted about 100 laws in the 2025 legislative session.
The Order:
The order claims state regulations make compliance challenging, could embed ideological bias in models, impinge on state commerce, and threaten U.S. AI dominance.
During the signing ceremony, the chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, David Sacks, said the order would have the administration create a “federal framework” for AI in conjunction with Congress.
In the meantime, the order empowers the Attorney General, FTC, and other agencies to push back on “excessive” state regulations.
» Reddit Sues Australia Over Social Media Ban
Reddit, a message board website, has filed a lawsuit in Australia’s highest court to overturn the country’s social media ban for children under 16. You can find details about the ban in last week’s Free Flow.
Details:
The company argues that the ban interferes with the free political communication rights implied by the country’s constitution.
The filing also says the law could impede political discourse and that “Australian citizens under the age of 16 will, within years if not months, become electors. The choices to be made by those citizens will be informed by political communication in which they engage prior to the age of 18.”
If the ban is upheld, the lawsuit argues Reddit should be exempt since it does not meet the definition of social media under the law.
» Federal Judge Blocks Social Media Age-Verification Law in Louisiana
A federal district judge in Louisiana has issued a permanent injunction against Louisiana’s age-verification law for social media, ruling that it violates the First Amendment and is unconstitutionally vague.
Details:
Judge John W. deGravelles granted a motion for summary judgment against the Secure Online Child Interaction and Age Limitation Act.
The Act required social media companies to verify users’ ages, obtain parental consent for minors’ social media access, limit data collection and advertising to minors, and restrict messaging between adults and minors in Louisiana.
Judge deGravelles said the scope of the term “social media platform” was unclear in the legislation, and the age-verification and parental-consent requirements placed burdens on lawful speech.
The Brussels Effect: Europe and Beyond 🇪🇺
» EU Calls on Hungary to Comply with Media Freedom Act
The EU Commission has opened a formal infringement procedure against Hungary for failing to comply with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA).
The Violations:
The Commission’s letter of formal notice cited Hungarian authorities’ interference with journalists’ and media outlets’ work by restricting their economic activities and editorial freedom as breaches of the EMFA.
It also pointed to inadequate protections for journalistic sources and confidential communications in Hungarian law, as well as a lack of judicial protections for when those rights are breached.
Authorities’ failure to meet transparency requirements regarding media ownership and to assess media market concentrations and the allocation of State advertising were also included.
Hungary has two months to respond to and address the Commission’s concerns, or risk a reasoned opinion, the second step in the EU’s infringement process, its final chance to address the issue before potential litigation at the Court of Justice.
Free Speech Recession 🌍
» Hong Kong Activist Found Guilty Under 2020 National Security Law
Jimmy Lai, founder of a pro-democracy tabloid newspaper, Apple Daily, has been found guilty in Hong Kong on two national security charges and a lesser sedition charge.
Background:
The 78-year-old British citizen was arrested under a national security law in late 2020 and has spent more than 1,800 days in a maximum-security prison.
In 2021, Apple Daily was forced to close over its criticism of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) amid months of pro-democracy protests across the country.
In 2022, he was sentenced to more than 5 years for unrelated fraud charges.
National Security Law:
Lai was convicted under a 2020 national security law that has been used to disband media outlets and civil society groups and jail dozens of political opponents.
The law created 39 new national security crimes, including treason and unlawful handling of state secrets, with the most serious offenses punishable by up to life imprisonment.
Chinese leaders said that the law was part of their drive to “restore stability” following the wave of unrest.
Lai’s conviction:
Authorities cited Lai’s lobbying of U.S. politicians during Trump’s first term, including meetings with the then-vice president and secretary of state, as evidence of sedition and colluding with foreign forces.
They also pointed to a New York Times opinion piece Lai authored in May 2020 that suggested ways to retaliate against China for its repression of Hong Kong, as well as his messages with other dissenters and Apple Daily leaders.
The judges said in their verdict that the evidence showed Lai’s “only intent” was to seek the downfall of the CCP.
» London and Manchester Police Will Make Arrests for ‘Intifada’ Chants and Placards
In the wake of the mass shooting at Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia, both the London Metropolitan and Greater Manchester police forces have announced they will arrest people who hold placards with or chant the phrase, “globalize the intifada,” an Arabic word for “uprising.”
Details:
The UK’s Chief Rabbi said the chant helped lead to the mass shooting at an event celebrating the first night of Hannukkah at Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia, on Sunday, and an attack on a Manchester synagogue in October.
A statement from the police departments said, “Violent acts have taken place, the context has changed - words have meaning and consequence. We will act decisively and make arrests.”
It’s worth noting that both the Australian federal government and the government of New South Wales, which includes Sydney, strengthened bans on hate speech, including antisemitic speech, in 2025.
» Canadian MPs Vote to Remove Religious Exemption from Hate Speech Laws
Canada’s House justice committee has added an amendment from the Bloc Québécois, a federal political party, to Bill C-9, or the Combating Hate Act, that would remove a religious exemption for hate speech in the Criminal Code.
Bloc leader Yves-François Blanchet said his party struck a deal with Liberal Members of Parliament to add the amendment in exchange for support for C-9.
The Amendment:
The Criminal Code currently exempts persons from hate speech prosecution, “If, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text.”
Conservative MPs oppose both the proposed amendment and Bill C-9 as written. Ontario MP Andrew Lawton said, “[The Liberals] are prepared to mount, with the support of the Bloc Québécois, a full-scale assault on religious freedom,” at the justice committee meeting.
Justice Minister Sean Fraser argued the amendment would not “criminalize faith” or religious texts.
Bill C-9:
The complete bill proposes new Criminal Code offenses, including a provision that would make it a crime to intentionally promote hatred against identifiable groups in public using hate or terrorism related symbols.
Those symbols include the swastika and SS lightning bolts, which were used during the Holocaust.
It also includes symbols associated with designated terrorist groups, including the Proud Boys, Hamas, and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
It would also make hate-motivated crimes a specific offense and prohibit the intimidation and obstruction of people outside places of worship and other “sensitive institutions.”
Ashley Haek is a communications coordinator and research assistant at The Future of Free Speech.