Free Speech & Digital Rights
Expanding government and platform coordination on content moderation raises serious questions about First Amendment protections in the digital age.
The Problem
The line between government and platform on online speech has blurred. Federal agencies coordinate with platforms on content moderation, the Supreme Court is sorting through Murthy v. Missouri, and Section 230 reform is back in front of every Congress.
Residents and small business owners face unclear rules about what they can say online — with real consequences for livelihoods.
Brian Mast — 9-Year Track Record
Talking points without legislation isn't representation.
What he’s actually gotten signed into law as the primary sponsor — across five congresses (2017–2026):
- 4
- bills became law in 9 years
- as primary sponsor
- 2
- of those just named buildings
- post office + VA hospital
- 1
- substantive policy bill
- 2017 VA reauthorization
- 0
- water-quality bills became law
- as primary sponsor
Source: production LegiScan database (sponsor + status records, queried April 2026) cross-checked against GovTrack and Congress.gov.
The Incumbent's Record
What Brian Mast Has Done
Mixed record. Mast voted NO on the April 2024 FISA Section 702 reauthorization (a clean Fourth-Amendment moment). But he also introduced — and then withdrew under pressure — language in the 2025 State Department bill authorizing the Secretary to revoke passports for speech the Secretary deemed terrorism-supportive.
Recorded Votes
- FISA 702 Reauth (April 2024)Reforming Intelligence and Securing America ActVoted NO
Mast called Section 702 'unchecked power…to survey individuals without a warrant' and cited 200,000+ improper FBI queries of Americans' data in 2022.
Initially failed; later passed in modified form · 2024-04-12
What He Hasn't Done
- Introduced passport-revocation-for-speech language in the State Department Policy Provisions Bill (H.R. 5300, 2025) and removed it via manager's amendment after public backlash.
- No record of a Mast position on Section 230 reform, government-platform jawboning (Murthy v. Missouri), or KOSA.
- No record on the TikTok ban (H.R. 7521 / PAFACA, 2024).
Compiled from The Floridian, MS.now, and Newsweek coverage of H.R. 5300 manager's amendment.
The Cooke Plan
What Alex Would Do
Specific. Sourced. Independent.
- 1
Warrant requirement for Section 702 queries of Americans' data
The bipartisan reform Mast voted FOR in spirit (and against in vehicle): require a probable-cause warrant before federal agencies query Section 702 collection for an American's communications. Modeled on the Lofgren-Davidson amendment.
- 2
Codify the Murthy v. Missouri standard
Federal-agency communications with platforms about content moderation should be transparent, logged, and subject to inspector general review — with civil liability for coercive jawboning. Free speech protected on the front end, not just litigated on the back end.
- 3
Reject any 'passport revocation for speech' language
On the record opposing any provision — in any State Department bill, immigration bill, or sanctions bill — that lets a Secretary revoke a passport based on the speech of an American citizen.
Stand with Alex on this.
Independent. No party. No PACs. Real fixes for Florida District 21.