When Trump targets journalists, the public pays the price | Opinion

Subpoenas of several New York Times reporters authorized by President Donald Trump's Justice Department are far more than an attack on reporters. It's an action that affects the rights of people in a free society to know what their government is doing.

It's also more than just a single strike against one news organization. It appears to be part of broader actions by the administration that have harmed press freedom.

On July 8, The Times reported that Trump relied on the older Air Force One jet when he left the NATO summit in Turkey rather than flying his newer, $400 million Air Force One donated by Qatar. Citing "people briefed on the plans," The Times reporters wrote that security officials feared the new jet lacked the necessary defensive features of the older model.

On July 19, Trump said the Qatari jet "has a lot of capability, but as I understand it, in about a month or so, they're going to send it to have it be maxed out."

The federal grand jury's subpoenas of the reporters involved is an attempt to discover their confidential sources. The Times filed a motion to quash those subpoenas. The newsroom's top lawyer wrote that the subpoenas "violate the constitutional rights of The Times and its journalists, (and) we are going to court to defend our journalists' rights to report freely … and provide the public with stories that matter."

A hearing on the subpoenas is scheduled for July 23 in the U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

Trump actions could intimidate confidential sources

The Trump administration is also seeking phone records not only of the reporters involved but also some of their relatives. There are other administration actions that reporters say could intimidate confidential sources:

∎ In January, the FBI arrived at the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson at 6:05 a.m. as part of a probe into accusations that a government contractor illegally revealed classified materials. The FBI seized her cellphone, a smart watch and two computers ‒ one with personal information, including communications with a physician and Natanson's fiancé.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press called this search "unprecedented."

Fortunately, a federal judge ruled in February that "an independent judicial review," and not the Justice Department, should examine Natanson's seized materials.

In May, U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga upheld that ruling, citing the First Amendment that entitles reporters "to some constitutional protection of the confidentiality of their sources." The Justice Department has already charged the federal contractor, but if government investigators can review The Post reporter's phone and computers, they'll discover every source that has given her information.

Much of her reporting was on the Trump administration's cutting the federal workforce. In May, Natanson was part of The Post team that won a Pulitzer Prize.

Many excellent sources want to remain anonymous, which is often how Americans learn about major government actions that would otherwise remain concealed.

Americans deserve 'information ... about the nation's highest office'

∎ In 2025, Associated Press reporters covering the White House as part of what's known as the "press pool" were restricted from covering the president in several limited locations, including the Oval Office and Air Force One.

The AP also was banned from the White House press pool.

AP's coverage is crucial because its stories appear in scores of newspapers across the United States and internationally. Why were its journalists banned? When Trump issued an executive order to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, the AP still referred to the Gulf of Mexico, its internationally recognized name.

In April 2025, U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, appointed by Trump in his first term, issued a preliminary injunction ordering the administration to allow AP reporters back into the Oval Office, Air Force One and other White House places: "If the Government opens its doors to some journalists ... it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints."

Two months later, a federal appeals panel delayed McFadden's order to lift the ban, and last July the full court of appeals upheld the delay.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the White House Correspondents' Association and 46 news organizations are working to help AP regain full access to the press pool so it can provide "information to the public about the nation's highest office."

'Government action is targeted at viewpoints that the President does not like'

∎ After complaining that National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) were "very unfair" and "very biased," Trump issued an executive order cutting off their federal funding.

The president's complaint is part of longstanding Republican claims that both news organizations are too liberal.

In March, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled the "government action is targeted at viewpoints that the President does not like and seeks to squelch. ... The First Amendment does not tolerate viewpoint discrimination and retaliation of this type."

The judge blocked federal agencies from enforcing Trump's order to cease funding. But that may not get federal dollars back for NPR and PBS because Trump also called on Congress to cut funding, and House and Senate Republicans did so a year ago.

Stephen J. Adler, chairman of the Reporters Committee, which defends the First Amendment rights of reporters and news organizations, said how dangerous it is for reporters to be intimidated: "Press freedom is about the rights of the public ‒ to learn how their community and country are being run and to make informed decisions based on independent reporting. When the public's right to know is crushed, as the Trump administration is trying to do with its subpoenas against The New York Times, all of us suffer irreparable harm, as does the freedom upon which this nation is built."

Saundra Torry is a former USA TODAY editorial writer and past chairwoman of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: When Trump targets journalists, the public pays the price | Opinion

Reporting by Saundra Torry, Opinion contributor / USA TODAY

USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect

Copyright Reuters or USA Today Network via Reuters Connect

This story was originally published July 23, 2026 at 7:55 AM.