The U.S. State Department’s annual survey of global human rights has put an unlikely nation near the top of its watch list: the United Kingdom.
The 2024 report, released this week, alleged that Britain’s record “worsened” over the past year, citing a range of concerns from restrictions on speech to the rise of antisemitic violence. Though similar criticisms were directed at France and Germany, the assessment of Britain stood out for its length and severity, suggesting Washington sees a deeper erosion of liberties in a country often regarded as its closest ally.
At the heart of the dispute is free expression — a value Britain has long prided itself on exporting through law, culture, and political tradition. The report acknowledged that the right is broadly respected but noted what it called “serious restrictions” on political speech judged “hateful” or “offensive.” It also singled out the government’s handling of unrest in the wake of the Southport murders, when misinformation about the identity of the attacker, the British-born son of Rwandan migrants, triggered a wave of anti-immigrant riots.
Hotels housing asylum seekers were set ablaze. Thousands were arrested. And Prime Minister Keir Starmer, a former chief prosecutor, vowed that offenders would face the “full force of the law.”
Read also: Kanu’s Incarceration: Exposing UN Hypocrisy On Human Rights
American officials took a different view. The State Department report faulted Starmer’s government for what it described as a chilling effect on speech, pointing to the prosecution of individuals who trafficked in inflammatory or conspiratorial claims. One man received a prison sentence for posting a meme linking migrants to knife crime. Another woman, a former nanny, was jailed after calling for hotels to be torched and immigrants deported en masse.
For British authorities, those prosecutions were about maintaining order and applying laws already on the books. For Washington, they are evidence of a democratic ally straying into censorship.
The criticism carries political overtones. At February’s Munich Security Conference, Vice President J.D. Vance accused European governments of putting “basic liberties in the crosshairs” and highlighted Britain as a place where “free speech is in retreat.” The vice president, who is currently holidaying in the Cotswolds, has made the theme of cultural freedom a central plank of his foreign policy rhetoric.
London pushed back. A government spokesperson insisted free expression remained “vital for democracy” and that Britain was “proud to uphold freedoms whilst keeping our citizens safe.”
The friction underscores an awkward irony: while Washington has historically held itself up as a guardian of liberty, its own human rights reports have long been criticized for being selective — harsh on rivals, softer on allies. That the United Kingdom should now find itself on the receiving end of such censure is a reminder that the language of rights is as political as it is moral.