Posted on 03/31/2026 12:54:43 PM PDT by DFG
Citing the First Amendment, a federal judge on Tuesday agreed to permanently block the Trump administration from implementing a presidential directive to end federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, two media entities that the White House has said are counterproductive to American priorities.
The operational impact of U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss’ decision was not immediately clear — both because it will likely be appealed and because too much damage to the public-broadcasting system has already been done, both by the president and Congress.
Moss ruled that President Donald Trump’s executive order to cease funding for NPR and PBS is unlawful and unenforceable. The judge said the First Amendment right to free speech “does not tolerate viewpoint discrimination and retaliation of this type.”
“It is difficult to conceive of clearer evidence that a government action is targeted at viewpoints that the President does not like and seeks to squelch,” wrote Moss, who was nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama, a Democrat.
Punishment for ‘past speech’ cited in decision The judge noted that Trump’s executive order simply directs that all federal agencies “cut off any and all funding” to NPR, which is based in Washington, and PBS, based in Arlington, Virginia.
“The Federal Defendants fail to cite a single case in which a court has ever upheld a statute or executive action that bars a particular person or entity from participating in any federally funded activity based on that person or entity’s past speech,” the judge wrote.
Last year, Trump, a Republican, said at a news conference he would “love to” defund NPR and PBS because he believes they’re biased in favor of Democrats.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
You have the right of free speech.... you fo not have the right to demand that I pay for your soapbox.
Yep.
Welcome to the modern Welfare State, where the Constitution gives you a right to government spending at taxpayer expense forever.
Because there will be no substantive impact, the dye is cast.
Amazing how far they can stretch the meaning of the words in the first amendment when it’s something THEY want, but then minimize and ignore with the second amendment which these libtard political judges disagree with.
CPB and NPR were created by Congressional action. They’ll have to be uncreated by the same Congressional action. Until the enabling legislation is repealed, there’s no way to shut them down.
The same is true for any other department or organization created by law through Congressional action.
This ruling has very little practical effect due to the disbanding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).
The CPB was the clearing house for government funds appropriated for public broadcasting. The CPB would distribute those funds to NPR, PBS, NEA, etc. That organization is gone and is not coming back.
What's left for the judge to rule in is grants that were distributed but terminated before their term was expired. Going forward, grants by the White House are discretionary and cannot be compeled; Trump just cannot say they are being withheld because the receiver is biased. The adminstration must cite competing priorities, limited funds, etc., but not biases.
-PJ
“Welcome to the modern Welfare State, where the Constitution gives you a right to government spending at taxpayer expense forever.”
____________________________________________________________
The solution is to repeal the enabling legislation, not ignore the law it created.
The president took and oath to faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress and defend the Constitution, which includes laws he probably doesn’t like.
The first amendment is designed to protect individual citizens from government censorship. It has nothing to do with forcing taxpayers to pay for propaganda.
As I understand it Congress passed a law that cut their funding.
The judge can do a work-around: instruct NPR and PBS to send cars to the federal mint to pick up as many bags of cash as they need.
“It is difficult to conceive of clearer evidence that a government action is targeted at viewpoints that the President does not like and seeks to squelch,” wrote Moss
PBS is a company and as such is not entitled to givernment subsidies
Hundreds of unelected black-robed Presidents.
The Framers’ Congress would have put a stop to judicial tyranny before it started generations ago.
Sad.
Restore the Framers’ Congress. Repeal the 17th Amendment.
Despite this legal block on the presidential directive, NPR’s financial situation remains impacted by other branches of government: Congressional Action: Last year, at the President’s urging, Congress voted to eliminate approximately $1.1 billion in future appropriations for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which traditionally funneled funds to NPR and PBS. Dissolution of the CPB:
Following these legislative cuts, the CPB shut down its operations and filed for dissolution earlier this year.
Past vs. Future Funding: While the court ruling prevents the President from unilaterally canceling existing grants or barring future applications based on past speech, it does not override Congress’s decision to stop providing new funding for public broadcasting.
That’s almost exactly what I was going to say. Just because you have free speech, doesn’t mean *I* have to *PAY* for it.
Defund this judge’s job. Free speech available at the Unemployment office.
What an absolutely absurd decision. In essence, he’s declaring that the Left has a constitutional mandate to broadcast their propaganda at taxpayer expense.
Incorrect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.