There’s a certain poetic symmetry to the fact that in the year 2025 — when most political discourse feels like it was cobbled together from a Reddit thread and a group chat full of GIFs — one of the most hotly-debated free speech battles is being fought over a meme account named NoMoore.
The state of Maryland now finds itself at the epicenter of a First Amendment showdown.
The “villain” — is NoMoore, a pseudonymous social media account with a gift for satire and criticism, a talent for trolling, and a distinctly unfiltered opinion about Governor Wes Moore.
Among their many visual masterpieces: Moore at a presidential podium rebranded with the word “NOPE,” and a delightful image of hundred-dollar bills raining around him like it’s his birthday in a hedge fund. This, apparently, references a Baltimore Sun story on a $1 billion business tax proposal, though the vibe is more Scrooge McDuck than an economic policy brief.
Naturally, NoMoore has opinions. And they are not subtle.
The Maryland Democratic Party, perhaps tired of being meme’d into oblivion, has filed a formal complaint, arguing that NoMoore is not just a garden-variety critic, but potentially engaging in campaign activity—and thus, should be regulated under state election law.
This is where the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) enters stage left, the Constitution in one hand, and historical receipts in the other.
Aaron Terr, who speaks for FIRE with the calm fury of someone who’s read too much case law, said: “The First Amendment is at its strongest and most essential when protecting speech about public officials and public affairs.” He added, “Anonymous political speech has been a cornerstone of American democracy since the Federalist Papers.”
This is a question of whether anonymous criticism of public officials can survive in a world where everything is tracked, tagged, and litigated.
Be the first to comment