Three weeks into Donald Trump’s second term as president, press freedom faces significant challenges in newsrooms across the nation.

In a media briefing on February 14, hosted by Ethnic Media Services, a panel of experts discussed if a crucial part of our First Amendment right is under threat.

Speakers

  • David Loy, legal director, First Amendment Coalition
  • Zach Press, senior staff attorney, Lawyers for Reporters at the Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice
  • Joel Simon, founding director of the Journalism Protection Initiative at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism in New York City

San Francisco’s KCBS radio station is under investigation by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for broadcasting information about an Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation. 

Meanwhile, Associated Press journalists are being excluded from White House events after resisting an executive order from Trump to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Even before Trump took office, major networks like ABC and CBS encountered legal actions from him.

“What power is the FCC asserting? It appears to be a claim that reporting the news is not in the public interest if the government doesn’t like what news is being reported,” stated David Loy.

The FCC holds regulatory power over broadcast media like radio and television, while print and digital media fall outside its jurisdiction. Its authority is based on the “public interest” standard established by the Radio Act of 1927 and the Communications Act of 1934 when there were limited airwaves. However, Congress, the courts, and the FCC itself have not clearly defined the “public interest” scope and meaning in subsequent laws, lawsuits, and regulations.

In January, Trump-appointed FCC chair Brendan Carr launched an investigation into NPR and PBS for allegedly “broadcasting underwriting announcements that cross the line into prohibited commercial advertisements.”

“It’s not the government’s business to dictate what the press reports, or how,” Loy added. “There’s a reason that the press is the only private institution expressly named in the Constitution, where the First Amendment guarantees its freedom.”

Loy warned that “the process is the punishment” regarding freedom of speech issues, emphasizing the risk of self-censorship. This risk is not confined to federal levels; local officials have long been threatening reporters, with many recent incidents occurring in California.

In May 2019, San Francisco police raided a freelance journalist’s home, seizing his equipment after he refused to name a source related to a public defender’s death. In April 2022, a Los Angeles County sheriff called for an investigation into an LA Times journalist who reported on a leaked video of excessive force by a deputy. In December, a San Joaquin County sheriff announced that journalists, who legally obtained court documents, could face criminal charges.

Joel Simon remarked, “This erosion of norms and legal safeguards for journalists is part of a global trend … Once your rights deteriorate, it’s very difficult to reclaim them.”

Historical press freedom violations in the U.S. predate the country itself, from a 1734 libel suit to the 1798 Sedition Act, and Nixon’s Watergate scandal in 1972.

Simon noted that the media’s institutional power has significantly decreased. “During the first Trump administration, the battle was over who controls the narrative … Now, we have to focus on defending our ability to do our work. If we don’t, we’re going to see those rights erode.”

Simon advised U.S. journalists to prepare for legal harassment similar to international journalists, often unrelated to content production but involving tax, fraud, or workplace issues.

Journalists can access legal resources from organizations like Lawyers for Reporters, ProJourn, and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Zach Press set it plain and simple: Self-censorship undermines news delivery. He noted Trump’s actions have increased “strategic lawsuits against public participation” (SLAPPs). These suits intend to deter negative publicity by burdening critics with legal defenses.

The upside? Many states have introduced anti-SLAPP laws that require the plaintiff to cover legal fees if a case is dismissed. States like Virginia, Colorado, Texas, New York, Washington, Kentucky, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and Ohio have adopted these laws.

Press described these laws as “a strong deterrent,” encouraging journalists to secure their work with thorough fact-checking, media liability insurance, and secure communication tools.

“Press freedom begins at home,” Loy added, urging journalists to remain vigilant against power abuses. “Ignore your rights and they will go away. The best way to stand up to a bully is to fight a bully. Yes, there are risks … but the press should not allow those risks to prevent it from fulfilling its function: to report the news.”