Laurence Fox is having a spat with Free Speech Union because they won’t support his legal defence. If you don’t know what that is, the union describes itself as a “non-partisan, not-for-profit membership organisation that stands up for people whose right to freedom of expression has been violated”. According to them, however, there’s a limit to the sort of free speech they’ll defend:

We’re sorry you felt let down Laurence. We considered your case carefully and concluded that encouraging people to destroy Ulez cameras — a criminal offence — wasn’t the kind of ‘free speech’ we could defend. But since that may not have been clear to you when you signed up, we… https://t.co/pVJqPm6Tg3

— The Free Speech Union (@SpeechUnion) September 25, 2025

You will get Fox, he’s out of the union

If you’re unfamiliar with Laurence Fox, he was once famous for alleged acting, but now he’s famous for embarrassing online exchanges (that and getting successfully sued). Fox is also the leader of The Reclaim Party, which is one of the many right-wing parties in the UK which are desperately trying to capture the attention of reactionary billionaires like Elon Musk (we covered more of them here):

Elon seems to have worked out where the line between free expression and incitement to murder lies.

Ahead of every single western government. https://t.co/Nx9w5onpfE

— Laurence Fox (@LozzaFox) November 17, 2023

Ironically, the above tweet shows Fox does believe there’s a limit to what could be considered ‘free speech’, which is worth bearing in mind as we go forwards (we should note we disagree with the idea that the phrase is “incitement to murder”, with proponents of a one-state solution noting both Israelis and Palestinians should enjoy freedom ‘from the river to the sea’).

Fox’s latest exchange began here, with the activist attempting to simultaneously defend Katie Hopkins and bash the Free Speech Union:

That’s right Laurence. We’ve provided @KTHopkins with full legal support throughout this investigation. https://t.co/ON1y0HwWz9

— The Free Speech Union (@SpeechUnion) September 23, 2025

This is one of those exchanges where both sides quote tweet one another, with Fox firing back:

I had been a vocal advocate for you and paid your top level subs since your inception.

Instead of supporting a “union” member @toadmeister decided to offer me my subs back rather than help me (facing 4 years in prison for a tweet about ULEZ) like a middle class loan shark.

You’re not a union.

You’re the bank of Lord Toby Young.

*In my opinion*

Toby Young is the founder of the free speech union; he’s also one of the most famously unlikeable people in the country. We’re not going to get too sidetracked, but to give you an idea of how unbearable he is, the following is something he wrote himself in a piece titled Call yourself a friend?:

Only four out of ten pals turned up for my stag do, not including the ‘best friend’ who organised it

It’s common that right-wing free speech warriors have this personality profile, because what they actually want is the freedom to be annoying blowhards who are spared mockery or derision – the sort of people who face rejection from even their closest friends.

The Free Speech Union fired back with the tweet from the top, adding that they’d offered Fox a full refund. This did not go down well with Fox, who replied:

What an embarrassing post from a so called “free speech union.”

You offered no hope after question time either, when I was called to be denounced by the actors union for saying Britain was a warm welcoming and tolerant nation.

I believed in you. I paid my membership.

You offer me my money back, like a bank?

Fakers.

No!

Not Laurence Fox’s belief in the Free Speech Union!

Questions for Laurence Fox

Getting back to freedom of speech, we’d like to use ours to suggest Laurence Fox’s Question Time appearance wasn’t quite as benign as he suggests. This is how Hannah Yelin reported on it for the Independent:

During a debate over whether media treatment of Meghan Markle revealed wider cultural racism in Britain, Rachel Boyle, a woman of colour, audience member and academic, said: “Let’s be really clear about what this is, let’s call it by its name, it’s racism.” Fox responded that discussions of racism in Britain were “really starting to get boring now,” and accused Boyle of reverse racism for pointing out that he is a “white, privileged male”. Since then, the actor has been busy making an apparent campaign to become the new poster boy for the populist right. In an interview with Talk Radio, Fox said the response to his remarks from “wokeists” felt like someone saying “I want to unload both barrels of a shotgun in your face”. In a further interview, he explained why he won’t date “woke women” – a feeling one has to assume must now be mutual.

Reading this, it almost sounds like Fox was playing up his right-wing ideas to grift to the right in a similar fashion to what he’s now accusing the Free Speech Union of doing?

Can we say that?

Probably not, you can’t say anything these days.

To be fair to Fox, if he is a right-wing grifter, he’s not very good at it, because he’s been very successfully sued:

Laurence Fox should pay “at least six-figure sums” in damages to people he referred to as paedophiles, the High Court has been told.

The actor-turned-politician was successfully sued by former Stonewall trustee Simon Blake and drag artist Crystal. pic.twitter.com/LqaY3svg1k

— Jason Reid (@JasonReidUK) March 22, 2024

This was him two months later:

Yes, it’s true. We all thought Lawrence Fox couldn’t sink any lower? he just has.

As a response to a woman who’s political views he disagreed with, he posted a vile ‘upskirt’ image of her.

A crime under, I believe, the Sexual Offences Act 2003. A possible 2 year sentence. pic.twitter.com/b9KhwIP6TO

— John O’Connell (@jdpoc) May 1, 2024

Is sharing lewd images without consent a freedom of speech issue?

We’ll potentially find out in 2027, which is when it may go to trial.

We checked to see if he’d tweeted at the Free Speech Union over this case, but the only instance of him mentioning ‘upskirting’ on X/Twitter is this, which happened after the alleged crime noted above:

Upskirting.

Revenge dog porn.

Look at them udders! pic.twitter.com/cXnojiCnGl

— Laurence Fox (@LozzaFox) May 23, 2024

We’re beginning to think this guy needs free speech because he’s not smart enough to think before he tweets.

Free speech police

As of the time of writing, Laurence Fox is repeatedly quote tweeting the last response he got from the Free Speech Union, which is the very definition of a one-side argument. Here’s one message:

You should swap the word “union” in the title of your organisation and replace it with “police.”

Good one – dynamite stuff – can see why he decided to risk embarrassment by replying to the same message.

Here’s the third response:

“Wasn’t the kind of free speech we could defend.” — @SpeechUnion

I wasn’t encouraging a criminal offence. I was supporting a freedom movement against the surveillance state.

Lucy Connolly was also charged with a criminal offence, so your argument is entirely hypocritical.

You take only the cases that make the ermine clad establishment stooge @toadmeister look good.

You don’t care about free speech. You care about looking good.

Free speech is great, but Fox should spend at least a little bit of energy on ‘looking good’. If he has tried to look good at any point in the last five years, please let us know, because we missed it.

Featured image via Rob Moore

By Willem Moore

From Canary via this RSS feed