Illegal To Defund NPR?

· Reason

You can't defund NPR? Last May, President Donald Trump issued an executive order on "Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media." 

The order targeted the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which at the time doled out funds to National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). Trump's order directed the CPB to cease funding to NPR and PBS.

Visit sportbet.reviews for more information.

Trump's reasoning for the order was quite explicit: "Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage." 

Yesterday, a U.S. district judge said the ruling was illegal. The judge, Randolph Moss, ruled that Trump had violated the First Amendment with the order because it amounted to punishment for politically disfavored speech. 

The judge said the order "clearly crosses the line" into something like politically motivated censorship. "The message is clear," Moss wrote. "NPR and PBS need not apply for any federal benefit because the president disapproves of their 'left-wing' coverage of the news." Trump's order, the judge wrote, amounted to government "retaliation" for speech.

There were several things to like about Trump's initial executive order. It noted that today's media market "is filled with abundant, diverse, and innovative news options," and it declared that "government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence." 

These are good points, and my colleagues at Reason have been making a similar case for many, many years. On the merits, there was never a good argument for taxpayer funding of public media. 

But as Reason's Jesse Walker wrote last year, there were some genuine legal questions about whether Trump had the authority to defund public media through executive order.

And Trump's criticism of NPR's coverage of him made the executive order look like an act of personal pique rather than a speech-neutral decision not to fund a government program. Moss wrote that the text of the executive order, along with other public statements, made it "difficult to conceive of clearer evidence that a government action is targeted at viewpoints that the president does not like and seeks to squelch."

As is sometimes the case, Trump did the right thing—but not in the ideal way. 

Practically, however, the ruling won't have much of an impact. Shortly after Trump's order was issued, Congress pulled about $500 million from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which then shut down. So at least in the short term, the ruling is moot. 

Strictly ballroom. That wasn't the only loss Trump faced in court yesterday. Separately, a federal judge said that Trump could not proceed with the construction of his planned White House ballroom until the $400 million project was approved by Congress. 

The project is being funded with private donations that have been routed through the National Park Service. But even still, Judge Richard Leon said, Trump had exceeded his authority to proceed with the project unilaterally. Congress, he said, must explicitly authorize construction. 

As I noted yesterday, Trump's ballroom plans have been criticized, with multiple media reports saying that some mostly unnamed architects are worried the ballroom plan was rushed through with insufficient review and oversight. Some of the stated concerns had merit, like stairs going nowhere and oddly placed windows and bathrooms. 

But while this project isn't exactly typical, and public buildings are obviously different than private developments, it's at least a little bit telling that one of the chief complaints about the project was that it was insufficiently bogged down in bureaucratic process and public review. It's almost like the delays are the point. 

In any case, the judge says the ball, or rather the building, is now in the legislature's court: "The President," the judge wrote, "may at any time go to Congress to obtain express authority to construct a ballroom and to do so with private funds." 

Congress? Act? I suppose there's a first time for everything. 

Scenes from Washington, D.C.: For years, Tail Up Goat was hailed as one of D.C.'s best restaurants. But the Adams Morgan establishment closed and is now set to reopen with a new name and new concept from the same owners. The new restaurant will be called Rye Bunny—and instead of a full-service, sit-down restaurant, it will be a counter-service spot, almost like your local deli, except with high-end fare. 

There's reason to suspect that this is a response to escalating labor costs in the District. The owners have talked about how dicey Tail Up Goat's finances were, even with the good reviews. The new establishment is designed to be different. "From the restaurant's perspective, the model is far more economically viable because they need nearly half as many front-of-house employees as they did before," reports Washingtonian. (Front-of-house employees are waiters, bussers, and the like.)

D.C. has a great food scene, but restaurants have struggled in recent years, with a record number of closings last year. And at least part of the struggle has been the costs imposed by the city via changes to the way restaurants are required to compensate tipped workers. Yes, some of those changes have been paused, though not fully rolled back. But owning and operating a restaurant is tough in the best of times, and D.C.'s government has mostly made it more expensive and more onerous.

For more, watch Justin Zuckerman's excellent 2024 documentary on why some D.C. restaurant workers prefer a lower minimum wage. 

QUICK HITS

  • Trump will address the nation about Iran tonight.

  • Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says regime change has already occurred in Iran. 
  • And an Iranian official says the Strait of Hormuz will reopen, just not for America.
  • New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose campaign was powered by social video, now says that city agencies may use TikTok. 
  • The Artemis II launch, which will take astronauts near the moon, is set for today. This will supposedly pave the way for an actual moon landing in the near future. The rocket being used for the launch is 322 feet tall. 
  • Congress is going after prediction markets.
  • The Supreme Court said that Colorado could not ban "conversion therapy" for gay and transgender minors. The state's law "censors speech based on viewpoint," wrote Justice Neil Gorsuch. 
  • "If Gen Z's general disinterest in religion persists, American society will only secularize further." On the supposed religious revival in America.
  • The decline in marriage is real. But it's concentrated in working-class women, not the ambitious strivers who populate trend pieces. 
  • There's a new trailer for this summer's forthcoming Supergirl movie. For all you 1990s comic book nerds, it even shows off Lobo. Holy guacamole!

The post Illegal To Defund NPR? appeared first on Reason.com.

Read full story at source