Conservative free speech group draws MAGA ire by critiquing Trump move to bar reporter from Oval Office

12 February

Conservatives and libertarians have long been critical of what they consider excessive speech policing from the left, especially on college campuses. Back in August 2016, New York Times reporter Cecilia Capuzzi Simon detailed conflicts between college administrators and the free speech group Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) — which is headquartered in Philadelphia and was co-founded, in 1999, by former American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) attorney Alan Charles Kors.

FIRE's Greg Lukianoff, Simon reported, complained that liberal and progressive college students were being unnecessarily "coddled" and that shielding them from opposing viewpoints wasn't doing them any favor. And quite a few right-wing pundits applauded FIRE's efforts, some of whom supported Donald Trump for president that year.

But now, in 2025 — three weeks into Trump's second presidency — some MAGA Republicans are angry with FIRE after the group criticized the Trump Administration for barring an Associated Press (AP) reporter.

In an official statement, AP said, "Today, we were informed by the White House that if AP did not align its editorial standards with President Donald Trump's executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, AP would be barred from access an event in the Oval Office. This afternoon, AP's reporter was blocked from attending an executive order signing."

FIRE agreed with AP's position.

In a February 11 post on X, formerly Twitter, FIRE argued, "Punishing journalists for not adopting state-mandated terminology is an alarming attack on press freedom. That's viewpoint discrimination, and it's unconstitutional. President Trump has the authority to change how the U.S. government refers to the Gulf. But he cannot punish a news organization for using another term. The role of our free press is to hold those in power accountable, not to act as their mouthpiece. Any government efforts to erode this fundamental freedom deserve condemnation."

MAGA Republicans were quick to attack FIRE, defending the barring of the AP reporter. And a group that many right-wing pundits applauded in the past for taking on progressive and liberal college administrators is now being slammed by Trump supporters.

X user Linda Reid Nico defended the AP ban, tweeting, "I think AP has earned disdain and should not expect front row seats to be arrogant - it’s not an attack on free speech."

Another X user, Robert Huggins, tweeted, "As I'm unclear as to where MSM starts/stops and the federal government begins, MSM's 1st Amendment rights are a bit hazy. IF MSM ever decides to stop shilling for the DNC and the deep state, then we can pick this issue back up."

Politico's Jonathan Martin found it ironic that MAGA Republicans were defending speech policing from the Trump Administration.

Martin tweeted, "The replies are invariably fun when these sorta folks go against grain of their core demo. Confusion, whataboutism, inane assertions - all of it."

X user Van Luken, a self-described "black-pilled conservative," told Martin, "Whataboutism is another made up word by the left so they can dodge hypocrisy" — to which the Politico reporter responded, "Na, it works for both tribes."

From Your Site Articles