First Amendment group defends anonymous X account as Maryland Dems file election law complaint
A recent election law complaint filed by Maryland Democrats against the anonymous X account and website NoMoore has sparked controversy and drawn the attention of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a prominent First Amendment advocacy group. The complaint alleges that NoMoore, which regularly criticizes Democratic Gov. Wes Moore through memes, charts, and editorial content, is engaging in campaign activity that should be regulated.
FIRE has raised concerns about the attempt to regulate anonymous political speech, emphasizing the importance of protecting speech about public officials and public affairs. The group argues that anonymous political speech has long been a cornerstone of American democracy, allowing individuals to express their views without fear of government retaliation.
NoMoore, which has been compared to the anonymous pro-Trump account “Catturd,” has come under fire from the Maryland Democratic Party for its efforts to prevent Gov. Moore’s re-election. The party alleges that NoMoore’s activities are campaign-related rather than issue-based, citing the use of the “NoMoore” moniker and content that appears to be aimed at undermining the governor’s candidacy.
Despite the criticism, NoMoore has defended its right to free speech, stating, “Despite what Wes Moore and the MDDEMS think, the First Amendment still exists in Maryland. We will never stop telling the truth.” The website has continued to post content mocking Gov. Moore, including photoshopped images and videos portraying him in a negative light.
Gov. Moore, for his part, has been working to address Maryland’s $3 billion deficit, a problem that Democrats attribute to his predecessor, Gov. Larry Hogan Jr. Moore has emphasized his commitment to fiscal responsibility and economic relief for Marylanders, while critics like Hogan have questioned his approach to governance.
The controversy surrounding NoMoore’s activities has raised concerns among First Amendment advocates, who point to the long history of anonymous political speech in American democracy. They cite examples like the Federalist Papers, written under the pseudonym “Publius,” as evidence of the importance of protecting anonymous speech.
The Maryland Democratic Party has defended its complaint, arguing that transparency is essential in election campaigns. A party spokesperson stated, “Marylanders deserve to know who’s behind shadow groups spreading disinformation about Governor Moore ahead of the 2026 elections.” The Maryland Board of Elections has confirmed that an investigation into the matter is ongoing.
As the debate over anonymous political speech continues, it remains to be seen how the issue will be resolved. The clash between free speech rights and campaign regulations highlights the complexity of balancing competing interests in a democratic society.
