This Bill Would Fine Social Media Companies $5 Million Every Day for Not Fighting 'Terrorism'
The STOP HATE Act wants social media platforms to report their moderation policies and outcomes to the government. And it’s not the only censorial measure Rep. Josh Gottheimer wants.

The idea that the federal government even talked to social media platforms about their moderation was a major scandal. After the Twitter Files leak revealed that the Biden administration was privately leaning on one platform to suppress "misinformation," the courts blocked officials from communicating with social media companies for several months on free speech grounds.
A bipartisan bill, however, would make it mandatory for social media companies to work with the federal government. The Stopping Terrorists Online Presence and Holding Accountable Tech Entities (STOP HATE) Act would require companies to provide triennial reports on their moderation policies—and violations they catch—to the U.S. attorney general.
The bill requires companies to issue specific policies for groups the federal government designates as terrorists and the director of national intelligence to also begin reporting on terrorist usage of social media. Companies would be fined $5 million per day that they fail to comply.
Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D–N.J.) and Don Bacon (R–Neb.) had first proposed the bill in November 2023. It died in committee at the time. Gottheimer and Bacon announced that they would be reintroducing the bill at a press conference on Wednesday alongside Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt.
"There is no reason why anyone, especially terrorists or anyone online, should access social media platforms to promote radical, hate-filled violence," Gottheimer said at the press conference. He cited supportive social media comments about the May 2025 murder of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington, and the AI platform Grok's sudden decision to declare itself "MechaHitler" earlier this month.
Meta, the company that runs Facebook and Instagram, is already known to have a list of "dangerous individuals and organizations" banned from the platform. When the list was leaked to The Intercept in 2021, it included around 1,000 entries taken straight from the U.S. government's foreign terrorist list, as well as various foreign and domestic entries sourced to private think tanks.
Hannah Byrne, former head of Meta's Counterterrorism and Dangerous Organizations team, told The Intercept that her team was "basically an extension of the government" in 2024 after leaving the company.
At the press conference, Bacon made it clear that the STOP HATE Act was meant to push social media companies to act even more like an arm of government censorship.
"People should feel like they're scorned for having these ideas and espousing these ideals. We need to work with our social media companies to clean this up," he said. "It's further influencing other young—more people are being influenced by what they're saying. They're saying that this is acceptable behavior. It is not. We need to hold these companies accountable and work with them to take it off the airwaves."
The specific idea that Bacon had in mind was antisemitism, and he made clear that it includes criticism of the State of Israel in his book. "I saw the protests out here the past few days. They were vile. You could see the antisemitism in their comments, the way they were treating some of our members of Congress who are Jewish," Bacon said.
Protesters stormed the congressional cafeteria on July 1 to call for food aid to Gaza, and interrupted Rep. Randy Fine (R–Fla.)—who has called for Palestinians to "starve away"—during a hearing on campus antisemitism last week.
Greenblatt warned that terrorists were using social media as a "force multiplier" and claimed that the legislation wasn't asking companies "to change their business," only to "knock off the Nazis." He said that the STOP HATE Act is a "bipartisan" measure backed by "patriots."
Civil libertarian journalist Glenn Greenwald had quite a different take. "There was [a] full consensus on the Right for the last decade that Big Tech censorship was a great evil, especially if pressured and demanded by the US Government," he wrote on social media in response to the STOP HATE Act. "All that changed with it came time to censor for Israel."
When Gottheimer and Bacon first proposed the bill in 2023, they indeed cited the recent Hamas attacks on Israel. Along with the proposed legislation, their press release called on the government to register social media platform TikTok and news channel Al Jazeera as foreign agents. "When our students and young people are openly supporting Hamas, we have to look to the source of the propaganda," Bacon said in the 2023 press release.
Meanwhile, within New Jersey politics, Gottheimer pushed for the U.S. Department of Education to investigate pro-Palestinian high school protests under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act last year. He is currently lobbying the state Legislature to pass an official definition of antisemitism, which ran into heavy opposition from Democratic gubernatorial candidate and Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop, who is Jewish.
But Gottheimer's censorial tendencies extend beyond Middle Eastern issues. The congressman has a reputation for being awkward and afraid of the public. At a 2017 town hall, Gottheimer reportedly demanded that journalists be banned from the room, then had a public meltdown when he found out that an elderly man was taking notes for a local newsletter.
And he was an early supporter of the push to ban TikTok. Back then, his rationale had little to do with Israel, antisemitism, or terrorism.
"Increased social media use among kids has been linked to development of eating disorders, depression, and other mental health challenges," Gottheimer said in a March 2023 speech. "Our children are worse off because of these apps' addictive qualities."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
And not a single word on the EU’s suppression of online speech.
Look at Droll-Troll's dull, racist post!!! Snot ONE single word of cunt-damn-nation of Idi Amin, who wants to EAT all of us that he supposed are his enemas!!!
Droll-Troll BLESSES cannibalism, is twat shit is going down here, people!!!
Foreign actions on US producers is part of the free market. - Eric, sarc, stg, etc.
Responding to those actions os a violation of the NAP.
Actually, there were lots of articles when the EU passed the worst of their laws suppressing speech. Just nothing recent because they haven't made big changes to their law recently.
Please stop interfering with his narrative. He has to claim to be discriminated against in order to feel alive.
Thinking Elmo’s going to be in a lot of trouble.
Remember when the DOJ/Biden admin labeled parents terrorists? This time will be different though, true censorship has never been tried. For fucks sakes.
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/paxton-secures-victory-foia-lawsuit-shedding-light-biden-administrations-labeling-parents-domestic
I guess only Biden could “jawbone” them into submission.
Would it pass the sniff test?
IIRC, Reason had a lot of articles pointing out that all those private companies could do whatever they wanted, and the Biden admin wasn't telling them what to do.
Suddenly it matters.
I hope you guys like cheering just one side of the sinking ship, but you'll have to keep jumping from one side to other to keep it from capsizing. Unless maybe you wanted to help dump all that government weight overboard and help stop the sinking.
“It’s ok because Biden did it first!”
Better late than never, I guess.
Of course, "terrorists" includes Catholics who still speak Latin - - - - - - - -
Everyone knows Latin is a terrorist gateway language.
Lol this will backfire when the MAGAs all get banned from social media. They certainly "promote radical, hate-filled violence".
Trump and his defenders have no concept of me today you tomorrow.
^Leftard Self-Projection ... because that's what Leftards do.
[WE] Leftards do it ... but we blame what we do on you 'icky' MAGA people.
Sponsor: Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5]
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6463/all-info
It would have been easier if you just said you don't know what "me today, you tomorrow" means. I'd clue you in but I know you believe that learning things is leftist.
In that magical crystal ball of yours you see into the future with?
Yeah; You can call that ball 'Self-Projection'.
It would have been easier if you just said you don't know what "me today, you tomorrow" means. I'd clue you in but I know you believe that learning things is leftist.
Course I do. You mean MAGA should be careful what they legislate because Democrats when given that power would byte them.
The BS in that is; MAGA didn't legislate it. Democrats did.
[WE] Leftards do it ... but we blame what we do on you 'icky' MAGA people.
I'm going to have to realize you're really SLOW mentally.
Seems like I'm about two-miles ahead of you all the time.
Step one. Report all congress-critters to the government as suspected terrorists and block their accounts. Can't be too safe.
I bless this mess, and this cumment about the cumments of "our" Congress-Slimes!!!
OK, so obviously there's some room to work here. We just saw how Operation Grayskull (which is an epic name, btw) just did a whole lot of good on the dark web. And "Stopping Terrorists Online Presence" - if it's to be believed that's its genuine intent - sounds like it could be a positive as well.
Like, we all know that the palestinians like to make their little "martyr videos" before they strap on their islamic vestments and find a soft target, and the same goes for all their buddies who like to decapitate people and splash it all over the internet. Seems to me there's a good reason to stop them from doing what they're doing, and it's the same reason in effect as what Operation Grayskull was.
Bad people actively doing bad things who need to have their social media presence and internet access curbed, because nothing good comes of what they're using it for.
That's not unreasonable.
Then theres no need to have any more room. And I say a lot less would do us good. We also just had the Gabbard files released.
On, the other had, presence on social media makes it easier to keep an eye on them. It's not like there aren't plenty of ways for terrorists to communicate that are much harder, if not impossible, to monitor.
So it's ok if the government uses underhanded backdoor means to coerce 'private companies to do what private companies choose' but it's now not ok that it will be out on the open?
I mean, nobody has a choice either way so why is it wrong here while Reason was defending it as 'they can do what they want with their property' before?