Imagine facing your nation’s Supreme Court for the “crime” of sharing a Bible verse. On October 30, that’s the reality for Päivi Räsänen, a Finnish grandmother, medical doctor, and parliamentarian. Her soon-to-be seven-year ordeal began in 2019, when she questioned her church’s support for Helsinki Pride and posted a Bible verse on X. That single tweet triggered 13 hours of police interrogation, two full trials, and now a third prosecution under Finland’s “hate speech” law.

Räsänen’s case might sound like an exclusively European story — but it also serves as a warning about the growing threat of censorship coming from the EU. While someone living outside of Europe might assume they are exempt from the troubling wave of censorship spreading across the continent, that assumption is dangerously mistaken.

The EU has implemented an online censorship law that could turn stories like Päivi’s into a legalized norm. The law, known as The Digital Services Act (DSA), poses one of the greatest threats to free speech online, not just in Europe, but worldwide.

Presented as a way to create a “safe online environment,” the DSA is in fact a sweeping censorship regime. It compels major online platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, X, and Google to take down “illegal content” or face crippling fines of up to 6% of their global revenue. For companies like Apple or Meta, that could mean billions. With penalties this steep, platforms have every incentive to preemptively over-censor content, not just in Europe, but everywhere.

And what counts as “illegal” content? That depends on the varying laws of 27 EU member states. One country’s vague definition of “hate speech” or “misinformation” can ripple outward, forcing platforms to delete content across the entire internet. What Brussels bureaucrats decide could silence speech in Boston or Boise — posts fully protected by the First Amendment, gone in an instant.

The enforcement system makes this worse. The DSA empowers “trusted flaggers,” which can include activist groups, regulators, or even private entities, to demand removals. The European Commission itself sits at the top, monitoring and punishing companies that don’t comply. In practice, this means platforms will act first and ask questions later, scrubbing lawful speech before it can cause “problems” in Europe.

Credit: Alliance Defending Freedom International

Päivi Räsänen’s case shows what happens when governments weaponize vague speech laws: peaceful expression treated as criminal conduct. The DSA threatens to make this dynamic global. By institutionalizing vague categories like “hate speech” and “disinformation,” it builds the architecture for censorship that knows no borders.

Americans should not be lulled into thinking this is someone else’s problem. The internet is global, and so are the platforms that host our speech. Already, U.S. lawmakers — from the House Judiciary Committee to Vice President JD Vance — have warned that the DSA could chill constitutionally protected expression here at home. The danger isn’t hypothetical: EU officials have already floated the possibility of censoring American political figures under the law.

The stakes are enormous. If the EU succeeds in exporting its censorship regime, authoritarian governments worldwide are likely to use it as a blueprint. They will point to Brussels as justification for their own crackdowns. Already, we’ve seen Europe attempt to export the DSA model abroad. For example, at the EU-Canada Summit, Canada and the EU agreed to advance a Digital Trade Agreement that expands the reach of DSA principles.

Free speech does not stop at national borders. If America cares about freedom of expression, it must push back against the DSA and its creeping global reach. Päivi Räsänen’s trial is a human face on what’s at stake. Her courage reminds us that when governments claim the power to police speech, no voice is safe.

* * *

Lorcan Price is an Irish barrister and legal counsel for ADF International.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Closing arguments were finally completed at the end of August in the National Security Law trial of Hong Kong businessman Jimmy Lai. Mr. Lai stands accused of colluding with foreign powers and faces life in prison. In all likelihood, the court will find Jimmy Lai guilty and sentence him to prison.

While we await the final verdict, the West should make a plan to help free Jimmy Lai.

To say Jimmy Lai has lived a remarkable life is an understatement. Born in mainland China, the now 77-year-old Lai moved to British Hong Kong when he was 12, where he believed he would have a better future. Starting out working in a factory, Lai worked his way up, eventually owning his own factory before starting the world-famous fashion brand, Giordano. As a billionaire with homes in London, Paris, and New York, Lai could have easily rested on his laurels and enjoyed a quiet retirement. However, Lai had a great appreciation for the political and economic system that allowed him to build his wealth.

As a British colony, Hong Kong enjoyed the rule of law and free market economics that allowed it to thrive. However, the handover of the city back to communist China loomed large. In an effort to fight for the values that made Hong Kong great, Jimmy Lai founded the Apple Daily newspaper. Becoming one of the largest pro-democracy newspapers in Hong Kong, Apple Daily and its founder fell in the crosshairs of the communists in mainland China through its pro-liberty content. Lai himself drew attention through his annual commemoration of the Tiananmen Massacre, a huge sore spot for Beijing.

While promised a degree of autonomy for 50 years, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has gradually encroached on the freedoms of Hong Kong, a city of 7.4 million people. The Basic Law, Hong Kong’s constitution, promises freedom of speech and rule of law; the past few decades, however, have seen a gradual erosion of these rights. For example, millions of Hong Kongers took to the streets to protest a proposed law that would allow Hong Kongers to be extradited for trials in mainland China. While this law was retracted, it wasn’t long before something similar was implemented to take its place.

That brings us to the National Security Law (NSL), which came into effect in 2020. Essentially, the NSL criminalizes any speech or behavior that the government sees as threatening its authority. For Jimmy Lai and other pro-democracy activists, this put them in danger. As was feared, the NSL has resulted in the arrest of hundreds of people. In a city once famous for its independent courts, the NSL has seen a conviction rate near 100%.

It was shortly after the implementation of the NSL that Jimmy Lai found himself in legal trouble. In August 2020, Lai was arrested and paraded through Apple Daily’s office, allegedly for colluding with foreign powers. The truth, however, was that Lai objects to the authoritarianism of the CCP and wants to fight to preserve the freedoms that made Hong Kong great.

Handout/Getty Images

It isn’t just the cause that makes Jimmy Lai a hero: Lai didn’t need to face the risk of arrest. In addition to his various homes around the world, Lai is a British passport holder. He could have fled Hong Kong at any time after the NSL became law. Many Hong Kongers already have. Running, however, is not in Jimmy Lai’s nature. As he put it, “I am one of the troublemakers. I cannot cause trouble and then leave.” Lai risked everything by fighting for liberty and again risked it by staying when he could have left.

Even while he waits for a verdict, Lai faces terrible prison conditions. He is being held in solitary confinement, 23 hours a day. He has significant health problems but is being denied proper care. There is a good possibility that Lai could die in prison simply due to the conditions of his imprisonment, which is why the West must act quickly.

What can be done? For starters, political figures across the West should continue calling for Lai’s release. President Trump has joined the chorus of international voices calling for Lai’s freedom.. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer needs to fulfill his country’s obligation to stand up for Hong Kong’s autonomy. Lai is a British passport holder and therefore he is Starmer’s responsibility. In addition to public pressure, Starmer must also pause the construction of a new Chinese mega embassy in London. China should not be allowed a larger presence in the British capital while it actively persecutes dissidents.

Western governments can also sanction those involved in the administration of NSL trials. The U.S. has already sanctioned several Hong Kong officials, but it can expand them to include senior HK officials such as Chief Executive John Lee, as well as the judges involved in these trials. The “One Country, Two Systems” framework promises Hong Kong a high degree of autonomy, something the NSL interferes with.

Finally, other economic tools can also be applied. Legislatures should consider efforts such as tariffs on Chinese goods as a way to put pressure on Beijing. Restricting the flow of advanced microchips into China would hit the Chinese government where it hurts and impose a cost for its oppression of Hong Kongers like Jimmy Lai.

The Chinese will, of course, counter by saying this is foreign interference in an internal matter. The problem with that argument is that China’s promises to Hong Kong are recorded in a legally binding international treaty, the Sino-British Joint Declaration. Sanctions are an appropriate response to breaking that treaty.

So, why should the West care about what happens to Jimmy Lai? First, what happens in Hong Kong doesn’t necessarily stay there. The Chinese government already has an extensive network set up to threaten dissidents living abroad. The construction of the mega embassy means these efforts will only continue and affect more British citizens. Second, Lai represents a voice for liberty in Hong Kong and China as a whole. If we want freedom to thrive, the world needs people like Jimmy Lai.

The clock is ticking for Jimmy Lai. Any day now, the judges hearing his case could sentence him to life in prison. His health and prison conditions mean his stay behind bars could quickly lead to his death. If the West wants to preserve its own freedom and that of Hong Kong’s, it needs to act to save Jimmy Lai.

* * *

Matt Cookson is an alumnus of the Young Voices Contributor Program and was a Middle East History and Policy Fellow with Young Voices. He also works in the supply chain for a U.S. Defense Contractor. His commentary has appeared in the Mises Institute, Real Clear Politics, the National Interest, Providence Magazine, China Source, and the Idaho Freedom Foundation. You can follow him on X @MattCookson95 and Substack @thewaythecookiecrumbles. 

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.