Connect with us

Lifestyle

PBS and Minnesota public TV station sue Trump White House

Published

on

PBS and Minnesota public TV station sue Trump White House

President Trump issued an executive order directing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and public television stations to withhold funds from PBS. On Friday, PBS — led by Paula Kerger (right) — and Lakeland PBS of Minnesota sued.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images, Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images, Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images

PBS and a public television station in rural Minnesota filed suit on Friday against President Trump over his executive order demanding that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting kill all funding for the network.

The suit alleges Trump’s order is unlawful, exceeding his authority as president and violating Constitutional protections of free speech because he has made clear he doesn’t like PBS’s news coverage and programming.

“This action challenges an unprecedented presidential directive attacking PBS and its member stations… in a manner that will upend public television,” the lawsuit states.

Advertisement

It continues: “The EO makes no attempt to hide the fact that it is cutting off the flow of funds to PBS because of the content of PBS programming and out of a desire to alter the content of speech. That is blatant viewpoint discrimination and an infringement of PBS and PBS Member Stations’ private editorial discretion.”

PBS President and CEO Paula Kerger declined comment Friday.

In a statement, the network said, “After careful deliberation, PBS reached the conclusion that it was necessary to take legal action to safeguard public television’s editorial independence, and to protect the autonomy of PBS member stations.”

The Minnesota station echoed PBS’ logic, saying it joined the lawsuit “to underscore the dire consequences on local member stations and our programming.”

In response, the White House said CPB is “creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayers’ dime.”

Advertisement

“Therefore, the President is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding to NPR and PBS,” White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement. “The President was elected with a mandate to ensure efficient use of taxpayer dollars, and he will continue to use his lawful authority to achieve that objective.”

Trump’s executive order accuses NPR and PBS of failing to provide “fair, accurate, unbiased and nonpartisan news.” He asserts that there are plenty of media options for people to choose from nowadays. 

“Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence,” the order states. It bans CPB from sending any money to PBS and NPR, and bars local stations from sending the networks any federal money.

On social media platforms, Trump has blasted the networks in capital letters: “REPUBLICANS MUST DEFUND AND TOTALLY DISASSOCIATE THEMSELVES FROM NPR & PBS, THE RADICAL LEFT ‘MONSTERS’ THAT SO BADLY HURT OUR COUNTRY!”

The two networks reject that characterization.

Advertisement

Beyond that, the lawsuit filed by PBS and Minnesota affiliate Lakeland PBS argues, “regardless of any policy disagreements over the role of public television, our Constitution and laws forbid the President from serving as the arbiter of the content of PBS’s programming, including by attempting to defund PBS.”

PBS follows NPR and CPB into court

PBS’ legal action follows parallel litigation filed on Tuesday by NPR and three Colorado public radio stations against the Trump administration on the same grounds.

The public television court filings say PBS would lose $81 million per year in federal grants and “a substantial portion” of the $227 million that public TV stations pay it in order to run programs that range from children’s shows to Ken Burns documentaries. A day after Trump issued his order, the U.S. Education Department cancelled a grant to CPB and PBS that paid for a major educational initiative – about $31 million annually.

Lakeland PBS, serves a region in Northern and central Minnesota that includes some of the state’s poorest counties and several tribal reservations. The station offers the only nightly television news program covering the region and offers curricular videos, lesson plans and other resources for local educators, according to the lawsuit.

While PBS member stations receive, on average, about 15% of funding directly from CPB, Lakeland PBS relies on federal grants from CPB for 37% of its annual revenues. It says that all of the money it pays PBS for programming and other services comes from those federal funds.

Advertisement

PBS shows make up more than half of Lakeland PBS’s lineup.

The lawsuit contends that Lakeland PBS does not have enough unrestricted funds simply to shift other money over to pay for the cost of PBS programs. And it says that financial support from local companies is declining, not increasing. Locally based philanthropic money has been hard to come by.

“Lakeland PBS cannot readily or affordably replace such content and services,” the lawsuit states. “The EO’s indirect funding bar thus poses an existential threat to Lakeland PBS, the only local source of television programming for hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans.”

The suit was filed by Akin Gump Strauss, a major Washington-based law firm.

Trump’s order, issued on May 1st, has been rejected by the board of the privately incorporated CPB, through which federal money allocated by Congress flows to public broadcasters, primarily local stations. CPB has not adopted the president’s decree. It is suing him over another executive order purporting to fire three of its five members.

Advertisement

Like the NPR and PBS lawsuits, CPB’s suit points to protections written into law by Congress safeguarding CPB and public broadcasters from political pressure applied by federal officials. They argue that includes the president.

Congress awaits request to claw back funds

According to House Speaker Mike Johnson and other lawmakers, Trump is intending to send a formal request to Congress in early June to rescind the $1.1 billion it has allocated for public broadcasting for the next two years.

That spending was approved by the Republican-led U.S. House and Senate earlier this year and signed into law by Trump. It’s unclear when the House and Senate will take up the measure, but Johnson recently mentioned the rescissions package as part of a focus on enacting more spending cuts. He vowed to “act quickly.”

Congress would have 45 days to approve the rescission request, once received, for it to take effect.

Disclosure: This story was reported and written by NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik with contributions from NPR Congressional Correspondent Deirdre Walsh. It was edited by Deputy Business Editor Emily Kopp, Managing Editor Vickie Walton-James and Managing Editor Gerry Holmes. Under NPR’s protocol for reporting on itself, no corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

Advertisement

Lifestyle

JasonMartin Says Adin Ross Disrespecting Doechii Stops in 2026

Published

on

JasonMartin Says Adin Ross Disrespecting Doechii Stops in 2026

JasonMartin
Adin Ross Disrespecting Doechii …
Will Not Be Tolerated!!!

Published

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

‘Everything I knew burned down around me’: A journalist looks back on LA’s fires

Published

on

‘Everything I knew burned down around me’: A journalist looks back on LA’s fires

A firefighter works as homes burn during the Eaton fire in the Altadena area of Los Angeles County, Calif., on Jan. 7, 2025.

Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images

On New Year’s Eve 2024, journalist Jacob Soboroff was sitting around a campfire with a friend when he made an offhand comment that would come back to haunt him: The last thing he wanted to do in the new year, Soboroff said, was cover a story that would require donning a fire-safe yellow suit.

Just one week later, Soboroff was dressed in the yellow suit, reporting live from a street corner in Los Angeles as fire tore through the Pacific Palisades, the community where he was raised.

“This was a place that I could navigate with my eyes closed,” Soboroff says of the neighborhood. “Every hallmark of my childhood I was watching carbonize in front of me. … There were firefighters there and first responders and other journalists there, but it was an extremely lonely, isolating experience to be standing there as everything I knew burned down around me in real time.”

Advertisement

In his new book, Firestorm: The Great Los Angeles Fires and America’s New Age of Disaster, Soboroff offers a minute-by-minute account of the catastrophe, told through the voices of firefighters, evacuees, scientists and political leaders. He says covering the wildfires was the most important assignment he’s ever undertaken.

“The experience of doing this is something that I don’t wish on anybody, but in a way I wish everybody could experience,” he says. “It’s given me insane reverence for our colleagues in the local news community here, who, I think, definitionally were exercising a public service in the street-level journalism that they were doing and are still doing. … It was actually beautiful to watch because they are as much a first responder on a frontline as anybody else.”

Interview highlights

Firestorm, by Ben Soboroff

On the experience of reporting from the fires

You’re choking with the smoke. And I almost feel guilty describing it from my vantage point because the firefighters would say things to me like: “My eyeballs were burning. We were laying flat on our stomach in the middle of the concrete street because it was so hot, it was the only way that we could open the hoses full bore and try to save anything that we could.” …

I could feel the heat on the back of my neck as we stood in front of these houses that I remember as the houses that cars and people would line up in front of for the annual Fourth of July parade or the road race that we would run through town. Trees were on fire behind us — we were at risk of structures falling at any given minute. It was pretty surreal because this is a place I had spent so much time as a child and going back to as an adult. … I had no choice but to just open my mouth and say what I saw to the millions of people that were watching us around the country.

Advertisement

On undocumented immigrants being central to rebuilding the city

These types of massive both humanitarian and natural disasters give us X-ray vision for a time into sort of the fissures that are underneath the surface in our society. And Los Angeles, in addition to being one of the most unequal cities between the rich and the poor, has more undocumented people than virtually any other city in the United States of America. Governor Newsom knew that with the policies of the incoming administration, some of the very people that would be responsible for the cleanup and the rebuilding of Los Angeles may end up in the crosshairs of national immigration policy. And I think that that was an understatement. …

Pablo Alvarado in the National Day Laborer Organizing Network said to me that often the first people into a disaster — the second responders after the first — are the day laborers. They went to Florida after Hurricane Andrew, to New Orleans after Katrina, and they’d be ready to go in Los Angeles. And I went out and I cleaned up Altadena and Pasadena with some of them in real time.

And only months later did this wide-scale immigration enforcement campaign begin … on the streets of LA as sort of the Petri dish, the guinea pig for expanding this across the country. And it’s not an exaggeration to say that the parking lots of Home Depots, where workers [were] looking to get involved in the rebuilding of Los Angeles, has been ground zero for that enforcement campaign.

On efforts to rebuild

Advertisement

The pace is slow and it’s sort of a hopscotch of development. And I think for people who do come back, for people who can afford to come back, it’s going to be a long road ahead. You’re going to have half the houses on your street under construction for years to come. And for people that do inhabit those homes, it’s going to an isolating experience. But there’s an effort underway to rebuild. …

There’s also a lot of for-sale signs. And that’s the sad reality of this, is that there are people who, whether it’s that they can’t afford to come back … or that they just can’t stomach it, I think, sadly, a lot people are not going to be returning to their homes.

On what the Palisades and Altadena look like today

They both look like very big construction sites in a way. There are still some facades, some ruins of the more historic buildings in the Palisades. … But mostly it’s just empty lots. And in Altadena, the same thing. If you drive by the hardware store, the outside is still there. But it’s a patchwork of empty lots. Homes now under construction. And lots and lots of workers. … There are still a handful of people who are living in both the Palisades and in Altadena, but for the most part, these are communities where you’ve got workers going in during the day and coming out at night. …

We have designed this community to be one that’s in the crosshairs of a fire just like the one we experienced and that we will certainly, certainly experience again, because nobody’s packing it up and leaving Los Angeles. People may not return to their communities after they’ve lost their homes, but the ship has sailed on living in the wildland urban interface in the second largest city in the country.

Advertisement

On seeing this story, personally, as his “most important assignment”

Jacob Soboroff is a correspondent for MS NOW, formerly MSNBC.

Jacob Soboroff is a correspondent for MS NOW, formerly MSNBC.

Jason Frank Rothenberg/HarperCollins


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jason Frank Rothenberg/HarperCollins

I don’t think I realized at the time how badly I needed the connections that I made in the wake of the fire, both with the people who have lost homes and the firefighters, first responders who were out there, but also honestly with my own family, my immediate family, my wife and my kids, my mom and my dad and my siblings and myself. I think that this was a really hard year in LA, and I think in the wake of the fire, I was experiencing some level of despair as well. Then the ICE raids happened here and sort of turned our city upside down. And this book for me was just this amazing cathartic blessing of an opportunity to find community with people I don’t think I ever would have otherwise spent time with, and to reconnect with people who I hadn’t seen or heard from in forever.

Anna Bauman and Nico Wisler produced and edited this interview for broadcast. Bridget Bentz, Molly Seavy-Nesper and Beth Novey adapted it for the web.

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

The Best of BoF 2025: A Tough Year for Luxury

Published

on

The Best of BoF 2025: A Tough Year for Luxury
High-end brands struggled to shake the gloom, with no sign of a rebound in view. Yet bright patches have emerged, with fresh energy from creative revamps, investor confidence in Kering’s new CEO and outperformance of labels like Hermes, Brunello Cucinelli and Prada.
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending