Attorney General Pam Bondi is facing significant backlash from conservatives after she suggested prosecuting Americans for “hate speech.” This statement came during an appearance on “The Katie Miller Podcast,” hosted by Katie Miller, the wife of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. Bondi’s comments were made in the context of the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist, which she cited as a reason for increased scrutiny on hate speech.
In the podcast, Bondi stated, “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.” She emphasized that her office would actively pursue individuals who engage in hate speech. This definition of hate speech, which can be subjective and varies widely, has raised concerns among many conservatives.
Critics, including Daily Wire host Matt Walsh, reacted strongly to Bondi’s comments. Walsh called for her resignation, labeling her remarks as “insane.” He pointed out that the issue of an Office Depot employee refusing to print flyers featuring Kirk’s image was already resolved through free market principles and questioned why the attorney general’s office would involve itself in such matters.
In response to the criticism, Bondi attempted to clarify her position. She stated that while hate speech is generally protected under the First Amendment, threats of violence are not. She commented, “Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime.” Bondi accused the radical left of normalizing threats and political violence, claiming that this trend must end.
Despite her efforts to narrow the definition of hate speech, Bondi’s initial endorsement of the term has drawn ire from many on the right. They argue that her use of the term gives legitimacy to its application by those on the political left, which could lead to overreach and suppression of free speech. The ongoing debate highlights the tension between free speech rights and the perceived need for accountability in the face of rising political violence.
