Let’s get this straight a federal judge struck down part of Maryland’s digital advertising tax because, apparently, telling the truth about taxes violates the First Amendment. Really? What’s wrong with letting Marylanders know they’re paying Governor Wes Moore’s digital tax? That’s not censorship that’s transparency.
This ruling reeks of judicial overreach. The tax itself still stands, yet the judge claims that forbidding companies from hiding it violates free speech. So now Big Tech gets to call itself the victim while Maryland’s families foot the bill. The irony is stunning.
Governor Moore’s 2021 digital ad tax targeted tech giants Apple, Meta, Google, companies raking in billions globally. The rates range from 2.5% to 10%, funding Maryland’s education reforms. It was a creative, state-level attempt to make trillion-dollar corporations pay something closer to their fair share. But Big Tech didn’t like that and ran to court. Now they’re waving the First Amendment like a magic shield.¹
Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby’s order declared the tax’s “pass-through gag rule” unconstitutional. She says it “facially violates the First Amendment.”² A Fourth Circuit panel earlier said the same, waxing poetic about the “grand American tradition” of complaining about taxes.³ Cute, but that’s not a constitutional argument, it’s a campaign slogan.
Here’s the problem: this logic flips accountability upside down. Businesses already pass along costs to consumers fuel taxes, bag fees, and processing charges. No one calls that censorship. The provision in question simply stopped billion-dollar companies from turning a policy dispute into a PR war. Moore intended to prevent political gamesmanship, not silence anyone.
If transparency is truly sacred, why not demand Facebook disclose its ad algorithms or Apple reveal its offshore tax shelters? Apparently, some speech is freer than others.
The ruling also sets a dangerous precedent. If every economic regulation is “speech,” then every corporate policy becomes a constitutional battle. Next thing you know, McDonald’s will sue over the right to label “$1 burger tax” every time the county raises wages. This isn’t liberty, it’s chaos disguised as freedom.
Maryland has already collected over $419 million from this tax since 2022,⁴ money meant for schools and infrastructure. The tech firms can afford it. The average Maryland taxpayer can’t. Yet the same companies that profit off our data now claim moral injury because the state tried to keep them from grandstanding on billing statements.
Call me old-fashioned, but I think government transparency should cut both ways lawmakers and corporations alike should own their choices. This ruling gives Big Tech another cudgel to whack state governments that dare challenge their monopoly power.
Governor Moore’s critics me included can debate whether this tax was smart policy. But let’s not pretend this decision protects “free speech.” It protects corporate spin. The First Amendment wasn’t written to defend multinational tech firms whining about their receipts. It was written to protect citizens from government censorship, not to help billionaires shape public opinion through their invoices.
So when the judge says silencing price labels is unconstitutional, I say maybe she’s the one who needs to reread the Constitution. The people of Maryland have a right to know who’s really paying and who’s really playing them.
Endnotes
- Bryan P. Sears, “Judge Strikes Down Provision of Digital Ad Tax as First Amendment Violation,” Maryland Matters, October 17, 2025.
- Ibid.
- NetChoice, LLC v. Brooke Lierman, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, July 2025.
- Office of the Comptroller of Maryland, cited in Maryland Matters, October 17, 2025.
Direct Line News is a Maryland-based free-access publication committed to the Republican reform tradition.
About The Author
