President Donald Trump’s attack on free speech extends far past the brief removal of a late-night host with millions of dollars to his name. Well-known MSNBC political commentator Chris Hayes described the move against Jimmy Kimmel as “the most straightforward attack on free speech from state actors” he has seen in his lifetime.
How is this so, when Hayes has covered the legalized backlash against college students protesting against Israel’s genocide in Gaza? He interviewed Mahmoud Khalil, a nonviolent student leader of these protests, who was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for 104 days and is now facing a deportation order because of his activism.
Hundreds of celebrities signed a letter supporting Kimmel and calling his removal a “dark moment for free speech in our nation.” While I appreciate notable public figures shedding light on obvious violations of free speech, it is concerning that it was not until a fellow, affluent celebrity took the hit that many decided to speak up.
We must identify the situation for what it truly is: an intentional move by the Trump administration to show the American public that, if he can quell the basic speech of a powerful and wealthy white man, he can do it to you too. The widespread effects on average people will be much more far-reaching and damaging to the country as a whole.
The supposedly fireable, offensive joke about Trump’s apathy towards Charlie Kirk’s death — in which Kimmel poked fun at a video of a reporter asking Trump how he was holding up the day after Kirk’s murder, and the president said “very good” and quickly moved on to White House construction updates — depicted what we should already know about Trump’s true motivations. Any grief he portrayed feels like a facade to distract from his exploitation of political violence in this country.
Trump is taking advantage of Americans’ fear and anger following a terrifying instance of violence, accompanied by a too-accessible video across social media platforms. But he’s not all talk. His “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence” presidential memorandum says that the U.S. should establish a national plan to identify and dismantle groups and networks that incite political violence.
In the memorandum, Trump claimed that political violence can be tied to sentiments of “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism and anti-Christianity,” “support for the overthrow of the United States Government,” “extremism on migration, race and gender,” and “hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion and morality.” The number of people who could fall under these categories is staggering.
This proactive policing would allow for Trump and his cronies to regulate and treat as terrorists individuals, organizations and communities that challenge his agenda. This order will empower federal agencies to target progressive advocacy, immigrant rights groups, racial justice organizations and nonprofits by conflating their political opposition with terrorism and political violence.
If extremism on migration and race means protesting against a brutal immigration enforcement agency that is violently detaining immigrants without due process, and extremism on gender means existing as a queer or transgender person, far too many people will be at risk of surveillance and arrest.
Trump’s definition of someone who is supposedly hostile to those who hold traditional American views on various issues certainly extends to anyone who criticizes Trump and his supporters for their direct attacks on his own country’s people and cities. He doesn’t get to claim his far-right government promotes peace, just as he is seriously considering invoking the Insurrection Act to surveil and suppress all Americans who disagree with him.
The case of Kimmel is a symbolic cause for concern, especially given the extreme backlash that allowed for his hasty return to work. However, excessive coverage of this one event distracts from the systemic repression this order implies. Instead, we must pay attention to the many people whose beliefs go against Trump’s, most of whom could face much worse treatment with little to no media attention or support if the order is enforced.
We must stand up to Trump’s weaponization of counterterrorism. If Trump can continually be allowed to label any dissenter as a terrorist — despite, historically, most political violence in the U.S. originating on the right — he has the power to do virtually anything he wants to his political opponents. Checks on his abuse of power must be initiated and upheld. If not, this country will continue to head down a dangerous path where anyone who falls out of line could be at risk.
Quinn Volpe is a senior in the School of Communication and Kogod School of Business and the managing opinion editor for The Eagle.
This article was edited by Alana Parker and Walker Whalen. Copy editing done by Sabine Kanter-Huchting, Emma Brown, Arin Burrall and Andrew Kummeth. Fact-checking done by Aidan Crowe
