Censor Watch

A Republican congressman and ally of President Trump, Michael Rulli, has filed a bill that would prevent the British internet censor Ofcom from enforcing Orwellian online safety rules on websites based in the US. This landmark bill would also prevent US courts from recognising or enforcing foreign fines relating to online speech.

Since Donald Trump returned to the presidency, he and his administration have been fiercely critical of the UK Government's approach to free speech, particularly online, repeatedly citing the Online Safety Act. These concerns are also levelled at the EU for its Digital Services Act. In the eyes of the US administration, these censorious legislative regimes have infringed not only on the free speech of British and European citizens, but also on the First Amendment rights of US citizens, while unfairly targeting American businesses.

The bill introduced by Congressman Rulli is called the Granite Act (Guaranteeing Rights Against Novel International Tyranny and Extortion).

Speaking to The Times, Rulli said: F

Foreign bureaucrats do not get to decide what Americans can say. My bill makes clear that if a foreign government tries to punish an American for speech protected by the First Amendment, that judgment is dead on arrival in our courts.

Ofcom has repeatedly gone after US websites for alleged breaches of the Online Safety Act, notably 4chan and Kiwi Farms. In March, Ofcom fined 4chan a staggering £520,000 after finding that it had failed to comply with its duties under the Act.

Both 4chan and Kiwi Farms have launched legal action in the US seeking an injunction against Ofcom. The regulator responded by asking for the case to be dismissed, arguing that, as a foreign governmental body, it was protected,claiming sovereign immunity, from being sued under US law. Rulli's bill would remove that protection.

It is not expected that this particular version of the bill will make it onto the statute book, but with support from a number of key Trump officials, the House Judiciary Committee, and the backing of both the White House and State Department, similar proposals could be taken forward.

The wording of the bill reads:

LIMITATION ON ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN CENSORSHIP JUDGMENTS.

(a) LIMITATION ON ENFORCEMENT

Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or enforce a foreign judgment, or a fine, order, or demand issued by a foreign court or a foreign state, enforcing a foreign censorship law.

(b) RIGHT OF ACTION

A United States person against whom a foreign judgment described in subsection (a) is entered, or upon whom a judgment, fine, order, or demand described in subsection (a) is served or purportedly served, may bring an action in an appropriate district court of the United States seeking declaratory relief that such judgment, fine, order, or demand is unenforceable under subsection (a)

 

Update: Another bill opposing foreign censorship from the likes of Ofcom

9th September 2026.See article from prestonbyrne.com by Preston Byrne

US Representative Warren Davidson has introduced the HOMEFRONT Act , the Halting Overseas Mandates from Extraterritorially Reaching Onto National Territory Act.

The HOMEFRONT Act is a GRANITE-style foreign censorship shield bill, the seventh such GRANITE-architecture bill or model policy to be advanced by American legislators in the last seven months, and the third such bill to be advanced in the last ten days. I anticipate there will be even more GRANITE-style bills, both state and federal, in the next several months.

In terms of where HOMEFRONT fits into the new, but rapidly-growing, ten-month-old American tradition of foreign censorship shield bills, many of Rep. Davidsons additional provisions hew closely to the original Wyoming GRANITE Act proposal introduced by Rep. Daniel Singh in that state earlier this year. There are also some novel provisions which have never been seen in the foreign censorship shield discourse before today.

Between the two bills, Rep. Davidsons bill is the more detailed and the more aggressive. Its private cause of action -- its sword -- includes damages language and would, if enacted, have greater deterrent effect than a declaration-only bill. Much of what Rullis bill implies is, in Davidsons proposal, made express.

Eeither bill is a dramatic improvement over the present state of affairs and, as a lawyer working in the area of foreign censorship defense, on the ground, either bill, if enacted, would be most useful to that work. Any legislator concerned about the fact that Americans are being threatened by foreign governments over our constitutionally protected expression could, quite safely, vote for either one.

WWE is a US wrestling organisation that is known for outrageous but entertaining hype. In addition to the wrestling it shows feature theatrical beatings and the like that are not shy of showing a little blood.

Netflix recently took to screening WWE programming and agreed censorship rules with WWE to censor (or no doubt to get some ideas not to get written into the script in the first place).

Nethertheless the censorship rules are being noticed by wrestling fans seeing some diminished fun in the proceedings. An example is Netflix's recent censorship of Monday Night Raw .

WWE made the decision to tape this week's Monday Night Raw which opened with angle of hype that saw Royce Keys and OTM attack The Usos in the parking lot, leaving them a bloody mess.

Unfortunately for the angle, and WWE for that matter, Netflix made the call to censor the segment heavily. Not only did it negate the angle's impact, but it also drew heavy criticism from the WWE Universe online. Shortly after Raw went off the air on Monday, Triple H took to social media to post the segment in its entirety, uncensored.

See a video of that uncensored segment in an article from si.com

BBFC Chief Censor David Austin will step down in July 2027. He can look back at a underwhelming career of guiding the BBFC into a more secretive organisation with reduced transparency towards public scrutiny.

During Austin's tenure we have seen:

• A 25 year rule imposed where the BBFC will not detail nor enter into conversation about any censorship or classification decisions in the last 25 years
• The removal of the facility for anyone to monitor recent rating and censorship decisions
• The removal of detailed cuts from the BBFC public facing database to be replaced by saying nothing or else adding a few vague and unspecific comments.

But on the positive side Austin has at least maintained policies of previous BBFC directors in making minimal cuts to 18 rated films. It's a bit hard to confirm whether the same is true of R18 films because there is no feasible method of monitoring such decisions.

The BBFC has found plenty to laud about though:

The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) today announced that David Austin OBE will retire as Chief Executive following 23 years with the organisation, including the last 10 years as CEO.

David will step down from his executive responsibilities in July 2027 and will continue to support the BBFC as a member of its Board, ensuring continuity and providing strategic guidance as the organisation enters its next chapter.

David joined the BBFC in 2003 as an Examiner, now known as Compliance Officers, following a career in the Diplomatic Service, with postings in South Asia, Central Africa and the former Yugoslavia. He became Assistant Director, Policy and Public Affairs at the BBFC in 2011, before taking up the Chief Executive role in March 2016.

During his tenure, David has overseen a period of significant transformation for the BBFC, leading the organisation through major changes in the way audiences access and consume content.

Under his leadership, the BBFC continued to expand beyond traditional cinema classification, establishing self-rating partnerships with major streaming platforms including Netflix, Prime Video and HBO Max. He also drove the organisation's engagement with emerging technology, including the use of artificial intelligence to support classification work, culminating in a first-of-its-kind agreement with HBO Max to develop and deploy a bespoke AI tool to support BBFC Compliance Officers in the classification of the streaming service's entire content library.

These developments have strengthened the BBFC's ability to support audiences in navigating an increasingly complex digital media landscape, while remaining firmly focused on its core mission of protecting children and helping audiences make informed viewing choices.

The BBFC Board will begin a recruitment process for a new Chief Executive immediately, with the successful candidate expected to be in post by July 2027. David Austin will continue to serve as Chief Executive until that time to ensure a smooth and orderly transition and will take up a Board position in July 2027. In his Board capacity, David will continue to be one of the BBFC's four Statutory Classifiers.

David Austin OBE, Chief Executive of the BBFC, said:

Leading the BBFC has been the privilege of my career. I am incredibly proud of everything we have achieved together over the past 23 years, including my last 10 as Chief Executive, and I am deeply grateful to the many people who have supported our work and to the UK audiences who place their trust in the BBFC every day.

What began as a curious fascination with film and classification, born out of my love of horror, has grown into a deep love for the BBFC. There is no other organisation quite like it, and I could not have imagined dedicating so much of my career to anything else. What has made my time here so special is not only the importance of our mission to protect children and help audiences make informed viewing choices, but also the exceptional people I have had the pleasure of working alongside.

I know the BBFC is in a strong position for the future. It is a dynamic and innovative organisation with a clear purpose, talented people and a strong foundation on which to build. As the content landscape continues to evolve, there remains important work to do, and I am confident the BBFC will continue to play a vital role in supporting UK audiences.

While the credits may be rolling on my time as Chief Executive, this is far from my final scene at the BBFC. I will continue to support the organisation as a member of the Board, and look forward to seeing it continue to evolve and thrive in the years ahead.

Natasha Kaplinsky OBE, President of the BBFC, said:

David has made an outstanding contribution to the BBFC and to audiences across the UK. His leadership, vision and commitment have helped ensure the BBFC remains one of the most trusted and respected classification bodies in the world. On behalf of the Board, I would like to thank David for his exceptional service and dedication over the past 23 years. We are delighted that he will continue to contribute to the organisation as a member of the Board.

The push to make people show ID to access the internet assumes those documents will stay secure. A database of 153 million license scans shows how reckless that assumption is.

If you ever needed more proof that governments pressuring companies to collect ID data from customers or users is a bad idea, you only have to look at what happened this week. A dark-web service advertised on August 31 has been offering over 153 million scans of driver's licenses, more than 10 million other identity cards, over 3 million travel documents and/or international IDs, and at least 579,000 medical cards.

Campaign group Reclaim the Net did some research as to the likely US source of the data breach. See article from reclaimthenet.org

Reclaim the Net further comments:

This is the system politicians are selling: showing your papers at every move you make. Next, they want you to show ID to speak online or access the speech of others, all under the name of child safety.

It is nothing but a surveillance dragnet that can only end in disaster.