First Amendment Group Condemns Maryland Democrats’ Complaint Against Anonymous Anti-Moore Account
A prominent First Amendment advocacy organization, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), has voiced strong concerns regarding an election law complaint filed by Maryland Democrats against the anonymous X (formerly Twitter) account and website "NoMoore." The account, known for its satirical and critical content targeting Democratic Governor Wes Moore, has become the subject of controversy, raising questions about the boundaries of free speech and political expression.
FIRE argues that the complaint represents an attempt to regulate anonymous political speech, which is a cornerstone of American democracy. According to FIRE’s Aaron Terr, the First Amendment is at its most vital when protecting speech about public officials and public affairs. The organization emphasizes the historical significance of anonymous political discourse, referencing the Federalist Papers, which were authored anonymously by prominent figures like James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay. These writings played a crucial role in garnering support for the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, demonstrating the value of allowing individuals to express their opinions without fear of government reprisal.
The "NoMoore" account operates anonymously, posting memes, charts, and editorial content that often satirizes Governor Moore and his policies. Its style has been compared to that of the pro-Trump account "Catturd," which gained notoriety for its online trolling of President Joe Biden and other Democratic figures. The Maryland Democratic Party (MDDEMS) alleges that "NoMoore’s" activities constitute campaign activity subject to state regulations, arguing that the account’s clear opposition to Moore’s re-election bid disqualifies it from being considered a purely issues-based platform.
In response to the complaint, "NoMoore" asserted that the First Amendment remains in effect in Maryland and vowed to continue publishing truthful content. The account has posted various satirical images and commentary, including a photoshopped image of Governor Moore at a presidential podium adorned with a "NOPE" emblem, as well as imagery of $100 bills raining down on him in relation to a proposed business tax.
Governor Moore’s recent comments regarding the state’s budget deficit have also drawn scrutiny from "NoMoore." Moore stated that his administration has been working to address the $3 billion deficit, which Democrats attribute to "creative math" employed by his Republican predecessor, Governor Larry Hogan Jr. Moore cited the hiring of a chief performance officer and claimed that Maryland has been innovative in its approach to governance, using the term "DOGE" to illustrate this point. However, these claims have been met with skepticism from Hogan, who cautioned against excessive spending and advocated for his "proven approach" that avoided tax increases.
"NoMoore’s" latest post features a video portraying Moore as the "King of Maryland," accompanied by a narrator who sarcastically states that nothing is his fault. The account has also highlighted several tax proposals supported by Maryland legislative Democrats, including a Doorstep Delivery Tax and a revival of the state’s sugary drink tax.
A source familiar with the situation expressed concern that the investigation into "NoMoore" could set a dangerous precedent for free speech. The source emphasized the importance of anonymous political speech in American history, referencing the Founding Fathers’ use of pseudonyms to advocate for the Constitution. The source also cited the 1995 Supreme Court case of McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, in which the Court ruled that a state statute banning anonymous campaign literature violated the First Amendment.
Governor Moore’s office declined to comment on the matter, referring inquiries to MDDEMS. The Democratic Party defended its complaint, stating that Maryland law requires any group spending money to defeat a candidate’s re-election to disclose its donors. A party spokesperson emphasized the importance of transparency, arguing that Marylanders have a right to know who is behind groups spreading misinformation about Governor Moore ahead of the 2026 elections.
The Maryland Board of Elections confirmed that it is investigating the complaint. The director of candidacy and campaign finance stated that the investigation is ongoing.
The controversy surrounding "NoMoore" highlights the tension between the right to anonymous political speech and the desire for transparency in campaign finance. The case could have significant implications for the future of online political expression in Maryland and beyond. The outcome of the investigation will likely be closely watched by First Amendment advocates, political commentators, and anyone interested in the intersection of free speech and election law. The debate raises fundamental questions about the role of anonymity in political discourse, the definition of campaign activity, and the extent to which government can regulate online speech.
