One way is through legislation, which would be reviewed by the Court. (See Trumps immigration attempts.) Another is an by an aggrieved party, most of which would have a very high burden of proving standing, but likely tossed out of court before the Supremes even see it years later.
Precisely my point.
Actually, a court cannot review legislation unless it is brought before the court. An aggrieved party would need to bring it with the attendant question of standing which you raise.
The following is not a response to you but to others on the August Forum.
I recognize that the MSM is doing its best to make the Donald look bad and that inaccurate stories regarding his actions abound. I voted for Trump but am very tepid in my support of him. However, the unfair assaults on him by the MSM and the Establishment are causing me to increase my support of him. I get it!
However, the First Amendment far outweighs the unfairness of the MSM portrayal of him. If we pass some sort of legislation allowing for oversight of the MSM’s reporting, then let’s remember that unfortunately someday the Opposition will again be in control of the Congress and/or the White House and will control that oversight (with a vengeance). The same issue pertains if the renewal of broadcast licenses is predicated on some sort of review of the licensee’s journalism.
I suspect that most, if not all, of the correspondents of the August Forum want to minimize government power, especially Federal government power. But now, because the Donald said it, you want to give the Federal government power over what can be reported in the news?