WASHINGTON 鈥� A federal judge ruled Tuesday that President Donald Trump overstepped his authority when he signed an executive order last year that blocked funding from going to the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Daniel Moss wrote in a that while many of the original issues in the case are no longer relevant after Congress rescinded funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the section of the executive order that called on agencies to end 鈥渁ny direct or indirect funding of NPR and PBS鈥� remains applicable.
鈥淭he message is clear: NPR and PBS need not apply for any federal benefit because the President disapproves of their 鈥榣eft-wing鈥� coverage of the news,鈥� Moss wrote.
鈥淏ecause the First Amendment does not tolerate viewpoint discrimination and retaliation of this type, the Court will issue judgment against the federal agency defendants declaring Section 3(a) of the Executive Order is unconstitutional and will issue an injunction barring those defendants from implementing it.鈥�
Moss was nominated to the district court for the District of Columbia by former President Barack Obama in 2014.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson implied in a statement that the administration will appeal the court鈥檚 decision.
鈥淭his is a ridiculous ruling by an activist judge attempting to undermine the law. NPR and PBS have no right to receive taxpayer funds, and Congress already voted to defund them,鈥� Jackson wrote. 鈥淭he Trump Administration looks forward to ultimate victory on the issue.鈥�
A PBS spokesperson wrote in a statement the organization is 鈥渢hrilled with today鈥檚 decision declaring the executive order unconstitutional.鈥�
鈥淎s we argued, and Judge Moss ruled, the executive order is textbook unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and retaliation, in violation of longstanding First Amendment principles,鈥� the spokesperson added. 鈥淎t PBS, we will continue to do what we鈥檝e always done: serve our mission to educate and inspire all Americans as the nation鈥檚 most trusted media institution.鈥�
A spokesperson for NPR did not return a request for comment.
No effect on congressional defunding
Trump titled 鈥淓nding Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media鈥� in May of last year, leading to two separate lawsuits that were later joined together.
One was NPR along with three Colorado stations: Aspen Public Radio, Colorado Public Radio and KSUT Public Radio. The was filed by PBS and Lakeland PBS in Minnesota.
The NPR lawsuit alleged Trump鈥檚 executive order had an 鈥渙vert retaliatory purpose鈥� and 鈥渋s unlawful in multiple ways.鈥�
鈥淭he Order is textbook retaliation and viewpoint-based discrimination in violation of the First Amendment, and it interferes with NPR鈥檚 and the Local Member Stations鈥� freedom of expressive association and editorial discretion,鈥� the lawsuit stated. 鈥淟astly, by seeking to deny NPR critical funding with no notice or meaningful process, the Order violates the Constitution鈥檚 Due Process Clause.鈥�
The lawsuits were filed before the Trump administration in June to eliminate $1.1 billion in previously approved funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provided grants to NPR and PBS.
The Senate 51-48 in July to approve the request and the House approved that version of the rescissions bill on a 216-213 shortly afterward.
Viewpoint discrimination
Moss wrote in his ruling that the original parts of the lawsuit addressing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting were no longer relevant since 鈥淐PB no longer exists, and no Court order declaring the Executive Order unlawful as applied to the CPB can afford NPR, PBS, or their member stations any meaningful relief.鈥�
鈥淏ut that does not end the matter because the Executive Order sweeps beyond the CPB,鈥� he added. 鈥淚t also directs that all federal agencies refrain from funding NPR and PBS鈥攔egardless of the nature of the program or the merits of their applications or requests for funding.鈥�
Moss wrote that while Trump can denounce news organizations as much as he wants, he cannot order government officials to engage in viewpoint discrimination.
鈥淭o be sure, the President is entitled to criticize this or any other reporting, and he can express his own views as he sees fit,鈥� he wrote. 鈥淗e may not, however, use his governmental power to direct federal agencies to exclude Plaintiffs from receiving federal grants or other funding in retaliation for saying things that he does not like.鈥�
The Trump administration鈥檚 attempt to block grants from the Department of Education, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Endowment for the Arts and other agencies from going to PBS and NPR would have widespread impacts, Moss wrote.
鈥淚t does so, moreover, without regard to whether the federal funds are used to pay for the nationwide interconnection systems, which serve as the technological backbones of public radio and television; to provide safety and security for journalists working in war zones; to support the emergency broadcast system; or to produce or distribute music, children鈥檚 or other educational programming, or documentaries,鈥� he wrote.
Trump administration lawyers, Moss wrote, were unable to 鈥渆xplain why NPR鈥檚 purportedly 鈥榖iased鈥� political reporting means that its production and distribution of programming like 鈥楾iny Desk Concerts,鈥� 鈥� runs afoul of the NEA鈥檚 authorizing statute.鈥�
is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: info@floridaphoenix.com.
