Introduction to the Lawsuit
PBS and one of its member stations in North Minnesota sued President Trump and several cabinet officials on Friday for Trump’s executive order on the public broadcasting system. PBS claims that the president’s decision on May 1 violated the first amendment of the constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Lawsuit’s Demands
In the lawsuit, the US district court in Washington, DC, is asked to confirm the unconstitutionality of the order and to prevent the Trump administration from enforcing the President’s claims. "After careful advice, PBS came up with the conclusion that it was necessary to take legal action in order to protect the editorial independence of public television and to protect the autonomy of the PBS member stations," said a PBS spokesman on Friday.
Similar Lawsuits
The network and podcasting counter of the network, NPR, submitted a similar lawsuit for the first amendment at the beginning of this week. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), a private company that distributes tax money to public radio and television channels, has sued Trump because of his attempt to dismiss three board members. For the time being, the CPB ignores Trump’s demand. However, if the federal financing of the public media is actually discontinued, some smaller stations could be forced from the air.
Trump’s Claims and PBS’s Response
Both the PBS and the NPR lawsuits focus on Trump’s own claims about the public broadcaster. He repeatedly insulted the public media for perceived political biases and described NPR and PBS as unfair to conservatives. "PBS denies the accused claims in the strongest possible conditions," says the declaration of action on Friday. "Regardless of political disagreements on the role of public television, our constitution and laws prohibit the president from acting as a referee for the content of PBS programming, also by trying to remove PBS."
The Alleged Violation
In legal usage, the alleged violation of the first amendment is referred to as "discrimination against viewpoints". Trump’s command "does not make an attempt to hide the fact that PBS funding is being cut due to the content of PBS programming and the desire to change the content of the language," continues the lawsuit. "This is an obvious discrimination based on viewpoint and a violation of the private discretion of the PBS and PBS membership stations."
Public Broadcasting Law
The lawsuit also states that the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 expressly insulated PBS and its member stations "from political interference". With the Executive Order of May 1st, Trump "tries to avoid the congress", which assigns donations for public media every year, adds the lawsuit.
White House Response
When the lawsuit was submitted by NPR, the White House commissioned that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting "creates media in order to support a certain political party to the taxpayers’ expense. Therefore, the President has his rightful authority to restrict funding to NPR and PBS". The NPR’s lawyers said that the explanation of the White House was further evidence of discrimination based on viewpoints.
Conclusion
PBS pushed back on Friday against conservative claims about liberal trends on the airwaves. It said that the White House’s speeches about "radical, left-wing propaganda" were misleading and "incorrectly characterized the variety of PBS programming". The participation of Lakeland PBS, a member station in North-Minnesota, is intended to illustrate the arguments of the lawsuit. The broadcaster is the only local TV news provider in the part of the state in which it operates. "Without Lakeland PBS, many residents in their reporting area would not have any access to television on local issues," the lawsuit said.
