Trump just casually attacked the First Amendment

President Donald Trump complains about news coverage incessantly, but on Thursday he took it to a whole new level. Trump raised the specter of taking the New York Times to court.

Here’s the tweet:

The New York Post op-ed by John Crudele that Trump cited is fairly conspiratorial, essentially defending Trump’s disproved claim that former President Barack Obama had wiretapped Trump Tower.

This isn’t the first time Trump has suggested this kind of thing, previously saying on the campaign trail that he wants to “open up” libel laws to go after the press. He went on: “So when The New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they're totally protected.”

Setting aside that there are no federal libel laws for Trump to change or open up, this is a clear affront to First Amendment protections for free speech and media. The press is purposely given a lot of leeway in the US Constitution — as long as it’s not printing something it knows is false or with “reckless disregard” as to whether it’s false — to write about and criticize public figures, especially someone like the president.

The Supreme Court has ruled on this several times, with perhaps the most famous case being New York Times Company v. Sullivan. Without this freedom, the press would be stifled, since it would be unable to run anything critical of the president or other public figures without fearing a crippling lawsuit.

This offhand tweet shouldn’t be dismissed. This is the president of the United States advocating the rollback of key American institutions and values — the First Amendment, free speech, and freedom of the press. Making such threats to the foundation of America’s democracy is a move toward illiberalism. It’s not just a tweet.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple of big issues with relying on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on:

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. And we can’t do that if we have a paywall.

So even though advertising is still our biggest source of revenue, we also seek grants and reader support. (And no matter how our work is funded, we have strict guidelines on editorial independence.)

If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today? Any amount helps.

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via