United States President-elect Donald Trump will soon take office, and although a great deal of attention has been paid to his positions on immigration, abortion rights, and democracy, less attention has been paid to how he threatens internet freedoms.

Technology experts have warned that his appointments to lead the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other government agencies appear inclined to censor online expression and make the Internet overall less free than it has been in years.

One of the most well-known figures who may pose a threat to freedom of expression online is Brendan Carr. Carr currently serves as commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the media, and was appointed by Trump to lead the agency. Carr has set himself up As a critic of Big Tech, and while the president-elect has called him a “free speech warrior,” Carr has targeted free speech online in the past.

“He will try to turn the FCC into an online speech police,” Evan Greer, director of the digital rights advocacy group Fight for the Future, told Al Jazeera.

And in the proposed right-wing governance guide for the next administration known as Project 2025a section Carr wrote for the FCC calling for the repeal of “the current approach to Section 230.” Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects platforms from liability for user posts and allows companies to moderate those posts. In Project 2025, Carr said Section 230 should include “substantive” reforms, including limits on companies’ ability to moderate or remove posts that reflect “underlying political views.”

In letters to social media companies, he also accused fact-checking services of being part of a “censorship cartel” and warned that the new Republican Congress and administration would “review” social media measures that have “rolled back.” [free speech] rights”.

“He has made it abundantly clear that he intends to use the FCC’s power to target ‘Big Tech censorship,’ which means punishing any tech company that does not promote right-wing propaganda to his personal satisfaction,” Mary Ann said. Franks is a professor of intellectual property, technology, and civil rights law at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.

In the past, Carr threatened to pull broadcast licenses from news networks he felt were “not acting in the public interest,” including CBS after it aired an interview with Kamala Harris, Trump’s presidential rival, which Trump criticized. Although he has presented himself as a champion of free speech, he also appears to support censoring speech that the incoming administration does not like.

As for the Federal Trade Commission, which aims to protect consumers, Trump chose Commissioner Andrew Ferguson to lead the agency. Ferguson is also seen as a threat to internet freedoms. He sees big tech companies censoring conservative speech and wants to use his power to push back.

Ferguson wants to use antitrust law to go after these companies, and has claimed that, as head of the Federal Trade Commission, he will help the Trump administration “eliminate uncooperative bureaucrats.” This could mean getting rid of important government employees and replacing them with Trump loyalists.

“Ferguson is singing a lot of the same tune with a slightly different set of authorities,” said Matt Wood, general counsel and vice president of policy at the nonprofit group Free Press.

Greer told Al Jazeera that Ferguson has made clear he will use the FTC to go after online speech related to gender-affirming care, LGBTQ issues and abortion.

Experts and free speech advocates have warned that both candidates appear to want to use the power they would have to elevate conservative voices and suppress voices they disagree with.

“There’s also Harmeet Dhillon, Trump’s pick to lead the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, another proponent of the ‘conservative censorship’ myth who has a track record of aggressively attacking social media companies and other entities that try to maintain minimum counterterrorism standards.” “Discrimination,” Franks said.

Dillon, a lawyer and conservative activist, defended a Google employee accused of sexism who was fired during the first Trump administration after he wrote a memo stating that because of biological differences, women were less proficient at programming.

As head of the civil rights division, Dillon would be able to go after tech companies, perhaps through lawsuits, for allegedly violating conservatives’ civil liberties, and could push those companies to allow more offensive or threatening speech on their platforms that targets minorities and local communities. The left and less talk critical of the incoming administration. In fact, at the time of announcing his pick, Trump praised Dillon for standing up to Big Tech and “prosecuting companies that use woke politics.”

“Come after” journalists

In addition to these candidates, there are people who will advise Trump, such as the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, and his friend, the tech billionaire David Sachs, who supported Musk throughout his acquisition of Twitter. They are also known to promote the idea that conservative voices are censored online, and are fierce opponents of liberal ideology.

Many First Amendment experts worry that Trump’s nominee to lead the FBI, Kash Patel, a former solicitor general and Trump loyalist, will go after journalists the administration doesn’t like if he is confirmed. In fact, he repeatedly said he would do so while on former Trump aide Steve Bannon’s podcast. This could also be an issue for internet freedom because it could use the country’s extensive surveillance state to do so.

“At a certain point, it becomes almost difficult to separate our digital rights from our physical rights,” Greer said.

It can be said that a person’s online freedoms are restricted when they are monitored because they are then less able to act freely without fear of retaliation. This creates a situation in which people are more vulnerable to self-censorship.

During the first Trump administration, for example, the government monitored the social media profiles of Black Lives Matter activists, raising concerns about their ability to freely express their political opinions online.

These attacks can be seen as part of what Wood called the administration’s “broader assault on free speech,” including Trump’s threats, like Carr’s, to strip broadcast licenses from news companies that report news in ways it doesn’t like.

It’s not clear whether the Senate will approve all of Trump’s nominees when they prepare to vote in the coming weeks, but what is clear is that many of them share similar ideals and could fundamentally change or limit freedom of expression online.