The FREE SPEECH Act of 2025 prohibits the FCC from conditioning regulatory approvals or licenses on a company's adherence to the political speech or opinions of the current presidential administration.
Jasmine Crockett
Representative
TX-30
The FREE SPEECH Act of 2025 prohibits the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from using its regulatory authority to pressure or force companies to align their speech or editorial content with the political views of the current presidential administration. This measure prevents the FCC from conditioning licenses or approvals on a company's political speech. Essentially, it blocks the government from leveraging regulatory power to control corporate expression.
New FREE SPEECH Act Stops FCC from Demanding Political Alignment for Licenses and Mergers
The aptly named Freedom from Regulatory Enforcement and Evaluation of Speech Policies to Ensure Editorial Choice Holds Act of 2025—or the FREE SPEECH Act—is a short, sharp piece of legislation aimed squarely at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
The FCC’s New Guardrails
What this bill does is simple but crucial: it explicitly forbids the FCC from forcing any company it regulates to change its speech or political opinions to match the current presidential administration’s views (Sec. 2). Think of it as putting a hard stop on government viewpoint discrimination in the regulatory space. This prohibition is broad; it applies whether the FCC tries to enforce it through a formal rule, an official order, or even if they try to use it as leverage during negotiations.
No More Political Quid Pro Quo
This is where the real-world impact hits home for regulated companies. If you’re a major telecom company seeking approval for a huge merger, or a local broadcaster trying to renew a vital license, the FCC holds immense power. This bill ensures that the FCC cannot use that power—that necessary approval—as a bargaining chip to demand political conformity. For example, the FCC can no longer tell a media company, “We’ll approve your acquisition if you start airing segments that align with the White House’s current policy priorities.” This provision is designed to prevent the executive branch from weaponizing the regulatory process to enforce ideological uniformity on businesses that rely on their approval.
Who Benefits from the Fine Print?
This legislation primarily benefits companies regulated by the FCC—think broadcasters, cable providers, and large internet service providers. For them, it means a more predictable regulatory environment where their ability to conduct business isn't tied to their political leanings. This is a win for the idea that government agencies shouldn't be in the business of policing political opinions. While the bill doesn't directly change anything for the average consumer, it reinforces a core principle: the government cannot coerce speech. For those who worry about the increasing consolidation of media and telecom power, this bill ensures that whatever political speech those companies choose to make, it's their choice, not a condition forced upon them by regulators holding the keys to their business operations. The language in the bill is remarkably clear, leaving little room for the FCC to maneuver around this restriction.