Finland recently convicted Päivi Räsänen, a sitting Member of Parliament, medical doctor, and grandmother, for a “hate crime.” This charge stems from a church pamphlet she authored more than twenty years ago at the request of her bishop.

Retroactive Conviction and Erasing Beliefs

Räsänen’s conviction classified her expression as a “war crime and crime against humanity” under Finnish criminal code. This ruling is particularly notable because two previous Finnish courts had examined the evidence and acquitted her.

As Räsänen awaited the Finnish Supreme Court’s ruling this week, she anticipated finally ending the state’s prolonged legal action. Instead, the highest court found a novel way to convict her by reaching back 22 years.

Application of Non-Existent Law

The court applied a law that was not even in effect when Räsänen originally wrote the pamphlet. Furthermore, the court mandated that the pamphlet must be “removed from public access and destroyed.”

The state sent a clear message: rules can be rewritten and applied retroactively, and evidence of dissenting beliefs can be erased. This development alarms Americans who often assume such injustices cannot occur domestically.

The Global Reach of the Digital Services Act (DSA)

Räsänen’s conviction is not isolated; it is linked to a global censorship mechanism known as the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). The DSA defines “illegal content” as any speech violating the law of the EU or its member states.

As of March 26, expressing the biblical view of marriage is a criminal offense in Finland. Consequently, this viewpoint now qualifies as “illegal content” under the DSA.

Impact on American Platforms and Speech

Major American platforms, including X, YouTube, and Instagram, face immense pressure to remove such content or risk substantial fines under the DSA. These platforms constitute the modern public square where Americans debate and share their faith.

Crucially, the DSA’s reach extends beyond EU borders. Even if an American posts content from within the United States, that speech can be subjected to EU censorship standards.

EU enforcement authorities have stated that the speaker’s location is “irrelevant” if a complaint is filed within the EU. This directly places American speech under the crosshairs of EU regulations.

Censorship by Proxy and Legal Challenges

To enforce this globally, the DSA utilizes “trusted flaggers.” These are EU-based, EU-funded NGOs empowered to report “illegal” speech, triggering content removal decisions worldwide.

This system functions as censorship by proxy, designed specifically to circumvent the First Amendment. This follows the recent $140 million fine levied against X after Elon Musk refused European censorship demands.

X has initiated the first legal challenge against the DSA in European courts. Räsänen, supported by ADF International, is currently considering an appeal of her case to the European Court of Human Rights.

A Warning for Free Speech

The censorship regime that convicted Räsänen for sharing her faith is precisely what the EU is exporting globally through the DSA. Any vague hate speech law in an EU member state can now be weaponized against speech occurring anywhere.

Finland demonstrated that the duration of speech, the number of people who share the view, or prior acquittals offer no protection once the censorship apparatus begins operating. As the U.S. approaches 250 years of independence, this situation mirrors the distant power the nation declared independence from.