1. United States
2. N.Y.
3. Letter

Vote no on H.Res.123. This resolution sets a dangerous precedent by naming specific commentators and pressuring platforms to deplatform them. Congress has no business identifying disfavored speakers and signaling to tech companies which voices should be silenced. Representatives Gottheimer and Lawler claim this targets antisemitism, but the resolution conflates legitimate political criticism with hate speech. Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism. Criticizing Israeli government policy or questioning Zionist ideology is protected political speech, not bigotry. When Congress labels specific commentators as spreaders of hate and calls for their removal, it accomplishes through corporate pressure what the First Amendment prohibits government from doing directly. This is textbook jawboning. The resolution may be non-binding, but the message is clear: lawmakers who pressure platforms today could write regulations tomorrow. That implicit threat turns private moderation into state censorship by proxy. The Supreme Court has been examining this exact mechanism for good reason. Whether you agree with Hasan Piker or Candace Owens is irrelevant. The principle matters. Once Congress establishes it can name individuals and demand their deplatforming, no political speech is safe. Reject this resolution and defend the First Amendment.