SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Spicer Confirms White House Actively Planning Attack on Press Freedoms
Effort to rewrite libel laws, says press secretary, 'is being looked into substantively and logistically'
May 01, 2017
White House press secretary Sean Spicer confirmed Monday that the Trump administration is actively--and in his words "substantively"--reviewing the nation's libel laws as it explores ways it could more easily sidestep First Amendment protections and target press coverage or news stories it deems objectionable.
On Sunday morning, White House chief of staff Reince Priebus told ABC's "This Week" that reworking libel law legislation is "something that we've looked at, and how that gets executed or whether that goes anywhere is a different story."
As a way to get official clarification of those remarks, New York Times correspondent Glenn Thrush asked Spicer during Monday's press briefing if it was a "project that is currently being working on by the [White House Counsel's Office]" and what the general status of the effort might be.
"I think the chief of staff made it very clear that is something that is being looked into substantively and then both logistically about how it would happen," Spicer responded.
Spicer downplayed the question, however, adding, "that's nothing new. It's something the president talked about on the campaign trail."
Indeed, Trump did talk about making it easier to file lawsuits against journalists and media outlets during the campaign--and it was something that sparked widespread outrage and concern.
During a campaign rally in February of 2016, Trump said, "One of the things I'm going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we're certainly leading. I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money."
Though concerning for even a presidential candidate in the heat of a campaign to say such things, the concerns have only grown now that the man talking about stripping away core constitutional protections occupies the Oval Office.
At the end of March, Trump re-floated the idea in a passing tweet as he criticized the ongoing coverage he receives from the Times.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) was among those who expressed immediate concern following Priebus' comments on Sunday.
And while some argued any effort to actually rewrite libel laws by the Trump administration would likely go nowhere, that didn't stop at least one journalist from making sure Priebus understood why--given the administration's documented position on free speech--Trump's chief of staff would have no grounds to file suit when called a "lunkhead" or "a ninny" or "a birdbrain."
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. If you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer confirmed Monday that the Trump administration is actively--and in his words "substantively"--reviewing the nation's libel laws as it explores ways it could more easily sidestep First Amendment protections and target press coverage or news stories it deems objectionable.
On Sunday morning, White House chief of staff Reince Priebus told ABC's "This Week" that reworking libel law legislation is "something that we've looked at, and how that gets executed or whether that goes anywhere is a different story."
As a way to get official clarification of those remarks, New York Times correspondent Glenn Thrush asked Spicer during Monday's press briefing if it was a "project that is currently being working on by the [White House Counsel's Office]" and what the general status of the effort might be.
"I think the chief of staff made it very clear that is something that is being looked into substantively and then both logistically about how it would happen," Spicer responded.
Spicer downplayed the question, however, adding, "that's nothing new. It's something the president talked about on the campaign trail."
Indeed, Trump did talk about making it easier to file lawsuits against journalists and media outlets during the campaign--and it was something that sparked widespread outrage and concern.
During a campaign rally in February of 2016, Trump said, "One of the things I'm going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we're certainly leading. I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money."
Though concerning for even a presidential candidate in the heat of a campaign to say such things, the concerns have only grown now that the man talking about stripping away core constitutional protections occupies the Oval Office.
At the end of March, Trump re-floated the idea in a passing tweet as he criticized the ongoing coverage he receives from the Times.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) was among those who expressed immediate concern following Priebus' comments on Sunday.
And while some argued any effort to actually rewrite libel laws by the Trump administration would likely go nowhere, that didn't stop at least one journalist from making sure Priebus understood why--given the administration's documented position on free speech--Trump's chief of staff would have no grounds to file suit when called a "lunkhead" or "a ninny" or "a birdbrain."
White House press secretary Sean Spicer confirmed Monday that the Trump administration is actively--and in his words "substantively"--reviewing the nation's libel laws as it explores ways it could more easily sidestep First Amendment protections and target press coverage or news stories it deems objectionable.
On Sunday morning, White House chief of staff Reince Priebus told ABC's "This Week" that reworking libel law legislation is "something that we've looked at, and how that gets executed or whether that goes anywhere is a different story."
As a way to get official clarification of those remarks, New York Times correspondent Glenn Thrush asked Spicer during Monday's press briefing if it was a "project that is currently being working on by the [White House Counsel's Office]" and what the general status of the effort might be.
"I think the chief of staff made it very clear that is something that is being looked into substantively and then both logistically about how it would happen," Spicer responded.
Spicer downplayed the question, however, adding, "that's nothing new. It's something the president talked about on the campaign trail."
Indeed, Trump did talk about making it easier to file lawsuits against journalists and media outlets during the campaign--and it was something that sparked widespread outrage and concern.
During a campaign rally in February of 2016, Trump said, "One of the things I'm going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we're certainly leading. I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money."
Though concerning for even a presidential candidate in the heat of a campaign to say such things, the concerns have only grown now that the man talking about stripping away core constitutional protections occupies the Oval Office.
At the end of March, Trump re-floated the idea in a passing tweet as he criticized the ongoing coverage he receives from the Times.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) was among those who expressed immediate concern following Priebus' comments on Sunday.
And while some argued any effort to actually rewrite libel laws by the Trump administration would likely go nowhere, that didn't stop at least one journalist from making sure Priebus understood why--given the administration's documented position on free speech--Trump's chief of staff would have no grounds to file suit when called a "lunkhead" or "a ninny" or "a birdbrain."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy