Free Speech on Trial in Dearborn: Facebook Post Jails Man, ‘Death to America’ Chants Get a Pass

In Dearborn, speech that criticizes the wrong people means jail. But calls for America’s destruction face no penalty.

Jailed for a Post, Excused for Chants

On August 16, 2025, Anthony Young, a 27-year-old from Garden City, Michigan, made a reckless Facebook post about Dearborn’s Arba’een march: “Someone should show up and let a couple of clips out.” Hours later, Dearborn police arrested him, charged him with malicious use of telecommunications services, and slapped him with a $5,000 bond, GPS tether, and internet ban.

No weapons were found. No violent history was uncovered. Young later admitted it was a foolish online spat. Yet Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud and Police Chief Issa Shahin branded him as if he were plotting an attack, treating vague words as terrorism itself.

Meanwhile, at Dearborn’s April 2024 Al-Quds Day rally, activist Tarek Bazzi led chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” The crowd’s rhetoric praised Iran’s anti-American stance, yet no arrests followed. In Dearborn, it seems, calling for death to an entire nation passes as “free speech,” but a regrettable Facebook post lands you in jail.

The First Amendment Double Standard

The Constitution protects offensive and even hateful speech unless it is likely to incite imminent lawless action. That is why “Death to America” chants — however vile — are legal. But that same principle should have protected Young’s Facebook post.

In Elonis v. United States (2015), the Supreme Court held that vague or hyperbolic online comments cannot be treated as criminal threats without proof of real intent to harm. And in Fields v. Philadelphia (2017), the Third Circuit reaffirmed the right to film public events — a likely interpretation of what Young meant by “clips.”

Young’s post was reckless but protected. Instead of upholding the First Amendment, Dearborn’s leaders imposed draconian conditions: a GPS tether and internet ban for a misdemeanor. That’s not law enforcement — that’s intimidation.

Selective Enforcement of Free Speech in Dearborn

What explains the disparity? Why is a young man jailed for words on Facebook while public chants glorifying America’s enemies face no scrutiny? The answer lies in selective enforcement.

Dearborn officials appear quick to punish speech that criticizes certain religious or political gatherings, but hesitant to confront rhetoric tied to powerful local figures like Imam Husham Al-Husainy — long associated with Hezbollah ties and mourning Qasem Soleimani. When the mayor himself attends rallies where anti-Israel and anti-American rhetoric flows freely, it’s no wonder the law is applied unevenly.

This isn’t neutral governance — it’s political protectionism. In a city where Arab Americans make up a majority, Hammoud’s administration is choosing which speech to crush and which to shield. That’s not justice. That’s bias written into law enforcement.

The Real Threat

The First Amendment does not belong to Dearborn’s mayor. It does not belong to political factions. It belongs to all Americans. If “Death to America” can be shouted from a stage in Dearborn, then Anthony Young should not be wearing a GPS tether for a Facebook post.

Selective enforcement of the law corrodes public trust and creates a chilling effect where dissenters fear punishment, while protected groups face no consequences. That is a direct assault on the principle of equal protection under the law.

Call to Action

Mayor Hammoud’s double standard cannot stand. Anthony Young’s charges should be dropped before his September 17 court date. Dearborn residents must demand equal enforcement of the law — not one set of rules for critics, and another for rally organizers with political connections.

America’s First Amendment is not negotiable. If Dearborn can jail one man for his words while ignoring open calls for America’s destruction, then free speech is no longer safe in Dearborn — and no longer safe anywhere.