Judge blocks Trump order to end federal funding for NPR and PBS

Citing the First Amendment, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss permanently blocked the Trump administration from carrying out a presidential directive aimed at ending federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, both outlets the White House has described as counterproductive to American priorities. Moss said the order is not only unlawful but also unenforceable, grounding the ruling in the idea that government cannot use funding decisions to retaliate against disfavored viewpoints.

In court, Moss ruled that President Donald Trump’s executive order to cease funding for NPR and PBS failed constitutional limits. He said the First Amendment right to free speech “does not tolerate viewpoint discrimination and retaliation of this type,” and he wrote that the case presented “clearer evidence” of viewpoint targeting and suppression efforts than the law typically permits. Moss, nominated to the bench by President Barack Obama, framed the dispute as one about how the federal government uses the “power of the purse.”

The judge described the mechanism of the directive as broad: the order told federal agencies to “cut off any and all funding” to NPR and PBS. Moss said the government did not identify a case in which a court upheld an executive action that bars an entity from participating in federally funded activity based on that entity’s past speech. He added that even if some legal claims were moot for reasons including the status of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the executive order still extends beyond CPB and directs agencies to withhold funding from NPR and PBS regardless of the nature of individual applications or requests.

In a dispute that NPR says focuses on retaliation for journalism, the network alleged that CPB violated its First Amendment rights when it moved to cut off NPR’s access to grant money appropriated by Congress. NPR also claimed the administration wanted to punish it for the content of its reporting. PBS, whose programming includes children’s shows and documentaries, and NPR, which includes news and culture programming, have long been at the center of debates over whether government should support public broadcasting.

Moss also relied on remarks Trump made earlier about defunding the outlets. The judge said Trump had told reporters last year that he would “love to” defund NPR and PBS because he believed they were biased in favor of Democrats. Moss wrote that the executive order’s design was intended to send a message that NPR and PBS would not need to apply for federal benefits because the President disapproved of their “left wing” coverage of the news.

The White House responded to the decision through a spokesperson, Abigail Jackson. She said Moss’ ruling is “a ridiculous ruling by an activist judge attempting to undermine the law,” and Jackson said “NPR and PBS have no right to receive taxpayer funds,” arguing that Congress already voted to defund them. Jackson also said the Trump administration “looks forward to ultimate victory on the issue.”

NPR president and CEO Katherine Maher said the ruling amounted to what she characterized as a decisive affirmation for a free and independent press. PBS chief Paula Kerger said she was “thrilled” with the decision and called it “textbook” unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and retaliation, adding that PBS would continue its mission to educate and inspire Americans as its most trusted media institution.

The decision came amid broader funding fallout. The executive order had immediately cut millions of dollars in Education Department funding for PBS for children’s programming, forcing the system to lay off one-third of PBS Kids staff. At the same time, Congress’ overall appropriations vote to eliminate federal funding for PBS and NPR had led to the closure of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the entity that funneled money to the television and radio networks.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Theodore Boutrous called the ruling “a victory for the First Amendment and for freedom of the press.” He said the court recognized that the Constitution draws a line government may not cross when it uses public spending to “punish or suppress disfavored expression,” adding that, in his view, the executive order crossed that line. He also pointed to the judge’s conclusion that the directive’s sweep reaches beyond CPB.