Donald Trump has waged war on the news media his entire career, frequently deriding journalists as “enemies of the people” and “real scum.” In his second term, he has gone far beyond name-calling, suing the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, exerting regulatory pressure on the parent companies of CBS and ABC, defunding NPR and PBS and arresting journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort.
One of the most serious threats to press freedom has been playing out in a low-level federal court in Virginia, and it already was weakening the ability of journalists to hold this president accountable for his actions. But a brave federal judge now has thwarted the administration and struck a strong blow for press freedom.
On Jan. 14, federal agents raided the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson, seizing two phones, two laptops and other devices. The ostensible reason is that Natanson had received and published information from Aurelio Luis Perez-Lugones, a federal contractor who was later indicted for mishandling government secrets.
Under the First Amendment, it is not a crime for journalists to disclose classified documents. But legal punishment was not the purpose of the raid. It was to deter and demoralize both reporters and sources who might document the president’s many mistakes and misdeeds.
“This is the first time in U.S. history that the government has searched a reporter’s home in a national security media leak investigation, seizing potentially a vast amount of confidential data and information,” said Bruce Brown, president of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “The move imperils public-interest reporting and will have ramifications far beyond this specific case.”
“The outrageous seizure of our reporter’s confidential newsgathering materials chills speech, cripples reporting, and inflicts irreparable harm every day the government keeps its hands on these materials,” warned the Post in a statement.
In a rare moment of candor in 2017, Trump told journalist Lesley Stahl why he relentlessly assails the media: “I do it to discredit you all and demean you all,” he admitted, “so when you write negative stories about me, no one will believe you.”
The Natanson raid was already having a negative impact. Her lawyer, Simon Latcovich, told Magistrate Judge William Porter, who is handling the case, that she had been receiving dozens, even hundreds, of tips every day from disgruntled federal workers documenting the disastrous impact of Trump’s unbridled budget cuts. “Since the seizure, those sources have dried up,” Latcovich said.
Those sources are critical to Natanson and any investigative reporter. As First Amendment lawyer David Schulz wrote in The New York Times: “History is full of examples of whistle-blowers who were able to inform the public of misconduct, illegality and abuse only through reporters who could guarantee them confidentiality and could publish free of government interference.”
“The Trump administration’s actions in this case have inflicted serious damage to journalism and could have a chilling effect on a free press,” media critic Tom Jones said in the Poynter Report. “While Natanson might not be a target of the investigation, sources might now be hesitant to deal with her – or any reporter covering political issues – out of fear they will be outed.”
This “chilling effect” is particularly insidious because its impact is often invisible. What stories are never written? Questions never asked? Sources never interviewed? What plan is Trump pursuing that we will never know about because a potential whistleblower is now too scared to come forward?
Judge Porter clearly saw the danger. He ruled this week that the administration could not go fishing for leads and leakers in Natanson’s devices. Instead, he would personally identify any evidence directly relevant to the Perez-Lugones case and hand it over to the government.
“Allowing the government’s filter team to search a reporter’s work product,” he wrote, “is the equivalent of leaving the government’s fox in charge of the Washington Post’s henhouse.”
This is a major victory for journalistic freedom and integrity. But as former Post editor Marty Baron warns, “this administration will set no limits on its acts of aggression against an independent press.” Journalists and judges have to counter that aggression with courage and conviction. Instead of looking over their shoulders, they have to look straight ahead and tell Trump, and the public, the truth.
• Steven V. Roberts teaches politics and journalism at George Washington University. He can be reached at stevecokie@gmail.com.