President Trump and Europe clash around the tariff, the war in Ukraine and the very purpose of the existence of the European Union. But they are also divided into freedom of speech-s potentially far-reaching implications in the way of regulating the digital world.

EU investigates US companies under Digital Services ActA new law that was supposed to prevent illegal content and misinformation to spread online. In the first major case to conclude, regulators as soon as this summer is expected impose Significant penalties – including a fine and a product change requirements – on Elon Male Social Media Platform, xsaying that the law was violated.

But the administration of Mr. Trump sees the law as a strike against his free speech version: one who unbuttones his allies to say what they want online, but limits the types of expression that he does not agree with in the real world, such as protests at universities.

President He claimed that Europe is in danger of “losing its wonderful right to freedom of speech.” Vice President JD Vance has defendant European nations of “digital censorship” because of its laws, which he claims to limit the ultimate right -wing voices on the internet.

Both administrative officials and their allies at Big Technology suggested that European rules for suppressing misinformation and a flammable speech on the Internet are an attack on the US companies – one against which the United States could fight against.

Because the inauguration of Mr. Trump, Europe and the United States have repeatedly clashed. In Ukraine Mr. Trump called support and threatened not to defend European nations that do not invest enough in their safety. About the store, announced Mr. Trump this week wide tariffs in Europe. And as European regulators begin to implement their new rules on social networks, free speech becomes another flashpoint.

“We are now on this downtime: the discussion of free speech affects every aspect of transatlantic ties,” said David Salvo, a researcher of the German Fund Marshall, who is an expert on the construction of democracy. “It’s a mess.”

Even before the 2024 elections, Mr. Vance in Podcast claimed that America could consider the attachment of his NATO support to “respect” American values ​​and free speech. In February Mr. Vance speak At the Munich Security Conference and warned that “free speech, I am afraid to withdraw.”

Such comments come even as the US administration alone quarrel with Universities for speaking on their campuses, Arrested Pro-Palestinian activists,, Built journalists From the White House Pool, canceled festival associated with identity in federal institutions and Policy triggered This has led to banned books in certain schools – moves that have alarmed speech freedom Guardians.

In Europe, officials have firmly complained to the criticism of their laws, claiming that they are helping to protect free speech, for example, ensuring that some ideas are secretly not promoting platforms, even while others are suppressed.

“We are not the Ministry of Truth,” said Thomas Regnier, a spokesman for the EU European Commission Executive Authority, referring to the Distopian force responsible for state propaganda in George Orwell in 1984. “

Still, some worried that the latest European policy around digital services could be attacked. In February, the White House Published a memorandum A warning that EU technology laws are being tested for unfair targeting US companies.

“Of course, our feeling is that we will be used by tariffs to encourage us to retreat to technological regulation,” said Anna Cavazzini, a German Green Party representative who was part of a trip to Washington for European legislators to meet with her American colleagues about digital policy and speech issues.

The tension has been stated for decades. Europe has long preferred more protective speech fences, while America gives priority to personal rights in almost everything but Immediate public security. Germany banned a particular speech related to Nazism, while other countries limit certain forms of hate speech to religious groups. It’s in Denmark illegal burn the Qur’an.

But although these tinted differences existed for a long time, the Internet and social media have now made this issue with geopolitical pressure. And that was suddenly deteriorating the new administration.

The Digital Services Law does not prevent certain content, but requires that companies have protective measures to remove content that is illegal on the basis of national or international laws, and focuses on whether decisions on content of content have been made in a transparent way.

“This is a question of how to ensure that your services are safe to use and comply with the law of the country where you do your job,” said Margrethe Vestager, a former EU Vice President of the European Commission from Denmark, who oversee Antatrist and digital policy from 2014 to 2024.

Christel Schaldemose, who was a lawsuit for negotiations for the European Parliament, said the law protects freedom of speech. She added, “You have no right to boost.”

The case against X will be the first major test of the law. In the first part of the investigation that regulators are now ending, the authorities concluded that x broke the act Due to the lack of control of its certified account system, the weak transparency of advertising and failure in providing data to external researchers.

In the second part of the case, the EU authorities are investigating whether X’s accession to a police content that has made from the user has made the center of illegal speech of hatred, misinformation and other material that could underestimate democracy.

This week, x said EU procedures performed “an unprecedented act of political censorship and an attack on freedom of speech.”

EU officials had to weigh the geopolitical consequences of targeting the company owned by one of Mr. Trump’s closest advisers.

“Will he get well with the president to accelerate the guy who is Buddy-Buddy with the president?” said William Echikson, an unrepentant older associate with a technological policy program at the European Policy Analysis Center.

X is not the only main technological company in conversation.

The Meta, which is also under investigation by EU, has abolished the use of facts for Facebook, Instagram and topics in the United States shortly after the election, and can eventually withdraw them all over the world. Mark Zuckerberg, Company CEO, called EU “censorship” regulations have argued that the United States should defend their technological companies from the attack.

This is not the first time America and Europe have had different standards for speech on the Internet. European Courts To adhere to The idea that information about a person may be Deleted from the internetthe so -called “right to oblivion.” American legal experts and creators of politics considered it a violation of free speech.

But the covenant between Mr. Trump and the great technological companies – which are strengthened by his choice – expands the gap.

European officials have vowed that Trump’s administration will not prevent them from standing according to their values ​​and implementing their new legislation. The next few months will be a key test as much as I can adhere to these plans.

When she visited Washington at the beginning of this year to talk to the legislators, said Ms. Schaldemose, she revealed a little appetite for trying to understand the regulations that helped exist.

“It doesn’t fit into the agenda of the administration: it doesn’t help them understand,” she said. “We don’t target them, but that’s how it is observed.”