U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi clarified remarks she made regarding the Justice Department’s authority to prosecute what she previously called “hate speech.” After facing criticism from conservative voices, Bondi specified that she meant only hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence could be prosecuted.
Bondi posts clarification on X
On Tuesday morning, Bondi posted to X, “Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime.”
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
In her post, she highlighted several federal criminal laws that make it illegal to threaten violence against individuals or public officials.
“Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent, but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence,” Bondi wrote.
Previous podcast remarks
The clarification follows comments Bondi made on the Katie Miller podcast suggesting her office would target “hate speech.”
“There’s free speech, and then there’s hate speech. And there is no place — especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie — in our society,” Bondi said.
She added, “We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech, and that’s across the aisle.”
Conservative voices push back
Bondi’s initial comments drew criticism from several prominent conservatives.
Fox News political analyst Brit Hume wrote on X, “‘Hate speech’ — repulsive thought it may be — is protected by the First Amendment. She should know this.”
Charles C.W. Cooke of the National Review wrote in a piece, “Legally, there is no such thing as ‘hate speech’ in the United States. And if she tries to prosecute it anyway? The Supreme Court will side against her, 9-0.”
Conservative commentator Matt Walsh added his own take on the issue.
“There should be social consequences for people who openly celebrate the murder of an innocent man,” Walsh wrote on X. “But there obviously shouldn’t be any legal repercussions for ‘hate speech,’ which is not even a valid or coherent concept. There is no law against saying hateful things, and there shouldn’t be.”
Additional controversy
Bondi has faced further criticism over comments suggesting the DOJ might prosecute Office Depot for refusing to print posters for a Charlie Kirk vigil.
“Businesses cannot discriminate,” Bondi said on Fox News on Monday. “If you want to go print posters of Charlie’s pictures for a vigil, you have to let them do that. We can prosecute you for that. We’re looking at that immediately. Office Depot had done that. We’re looking at that.”
Walsh responded, calling for President Trump to “get rid of her,” and arguing that conservatives have long fought for the right to refuse service.
“We won that fight,” he said on X. “Now Pam Bondi wants to roll it all back for no reason. The employee who didn’t print the flyer was already fired by his employer. This stuff is being handled successfully through free speech and free markets.”
Journalist Mary Katherine Ham also weighed in, referencing the Supreme Court ruling that a Colorado baker had the right to refuse to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
“They don’t actually have to bake the cake,” she said on X, reposting Bondi’s interview.
The heated discourse comes in the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, fueling emotionally charged rhetoric on social media and beyond. In this week’s episode of Bias Breakdown, Straight Arrow News examines how left- and right-leaning media coverage of Charlie Kirk’s death may be intensifying partisan divides. The episode also explores how the nation has become more divided on key issues, providing data to illustrate the trend.
