House Resolution Calls for US to Use 'Economic Tools' Against EU/UK Digital Laws, Citing Censorship and Trade Barriers

This House Resolution is essentially a strong policy statement asserting that the digital regulations passed by the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK) are unfair, act as trade barriers, and violate the free speech rights of Americans. It specifically calls out the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA), along with the UK’s Online Safety Act (OSA), expressing official disapproval. The resolution doesn't create new law, but it lays out a clear roadmap for a future administration—specifically calling on the “Trump administration”—to use diplomatic and economic pressure to push back against these foreign regulations and protect U.S. tech companies and citizens against what it frames as censorship and unfair competition.

The Free Speech Fight Moves Overseas

At the core of this resolution is the argument that terms like “misinformation” and “hate speech,” as defined in European law, are being used to censor protected political speech by U.S. citizens online. The resolution argues that because American tech giants like Meta and Alphabet operate globally, these European rules effectively become the de facto international standard for content moderation. This means if you post something that is perfectly legal under the First Amendment in the U.S., a European regulation could still force a U.S. company to take it down. The resolution cites past alleged collusion between the Biden administration and social media companies to censor content related to elections and COVID-19 as proof that these broad censorship powers—whether domestic or foreign—are a threat to free expression.

Unfair Trade or Necessary Regulation?

For most people, the biggest impact of this resolution could come from the trade implications. The resolution claims that the European laws, particularly the DMA, are specifically designed to target U.S. tech giants while exempting local European competitors. It views these regulations as a targeted trade barrier—a “tax on American innovation”—that forces U.S. companies to incur significant compliance costs. If you work for a U.S. tech company, this could mean less revenue and fewer resources dedicated to the U.S. market. The resolution calls for the next administration to use “diplomatic and economic tools” to counter these laws, which is policy-speak for potential tariffs, sanctions, or trade disputes. While this could potentially lower compliance costs for large tech firms, it risks escalating international tensions, which could ultimately lead to higher costs for U.S. consumers if a trade war breaks out.

Rejecting Foreign Antitrust

One of the most direct calls to action is aimed at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The resolution urges these agencies to outright reject the antitrust principles underlying the EU’s DMA and the UK’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act. Furthermore, it calls on the DOJ and FTC not to cooperate with European governments in enforcing these foreign antitrust laws. This is a big deal because the EU has been far more aggressive than the U.S. in breaking up or regulating the market dominance of large tech platforms. By instructing U.S. agencies to reject these principles and refuse cooperation, the resolution is essentially advocating for shielding major U.S. tech companies from global competition oversight. While this might protect U.S. corporate interests, it could undermine international efforts to ensure fairer digital marketplaces, potentially limiting consumer choice or innovation if unchecked monopolies are allowed to grow globally.