PBS suing Trump administration over defunding — three days after NPR filed similar case
PBS filed suit Friday against President Donald Trump and other administration officials to block his order stripping federal funding from the 330-station public television system, three days after NPR did the same for its radio network.
In its lawsuit, PBS relies on similar arguments, saying Trump was overstepping his authority and engaging in 'viewpoint discrimination' because of his claim that PBS' news coverage is biased against conservatives.
'PBS disputes those charged assertions in the strongest possible terms,' lawyer Z.W. Julius Chen wrote in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington.
3 PBS filed suit Friday against the Trump administration to block his order to strip federal funding from the television station.
Shutterstock
'But regardless of any policy disagreements over the role of public television, our Constitution and laws forbid the President from serving as the arbiter of the content of PBS's programming, including by attempting to defund PBS.'
It was the latest of many legal actions taken against the administration for its moves, including several by media organizations impacted by Trump's orders.
Northern Minnesota PBS station joins in the lawsuit
PBS was joined as a plaintiff by one of its stations, Lakeland PBS, which serves rural areas in northern and central Minnesota.
Trump's order is an 'existential threat' to the station, the lawsuit said.
A PBS spokesman said that 'after careful deliberation, PBS reached the conclusion that it was necessary to take legal action to safeguard public television's editorial independence, and to protect the autonomy of PBS member stations.'
3 The lawsuit reveals that PBS claims President Trump overstepped his authority and engaged in 'viewpoint discrimination' because of his claim that PBS's news coverage is biased against conservatives.
AP
Through an executive order earlier this month, Trump told the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and federal agencies to stop funding the two systems.
Through the corporation alone, PBS is receiving $325 million this year, most of which goes directly to individual stations.
PBS, which makes much of the programming used by the stations, said it gets 22% of its revenue directly from the feds.
Sixty-one percent of PBS' budget is funded through individual station dues, and the stations raise the bulk of that money through the government.
3 Lawyer Z.W. Julius Chen wrote in the suit, 'PBS disputes those charged assertions in the strongest possible terms.'
AP
Interrupting 'a rich tapestry of programming'
Trump's order 'would have profound impacts on the ability of PBS and PBS member stations to provide a rich tapestry of programming to all Americans,' Chen wrote.
PBS said the U.S. Department of Education has canceled a $78 million grant to the system for educational programming, used to make children's shows like 'Sesame Street,' 'Clifford the Big Red Dog' and 'Reading Rainbow.'
For Minnesota residents, the order threatens the 'Lakeland Learns' education program and 'Lakeland News,' described in the lawsuit as the only television program in the region providing local news, weather and sports.
Besides Trump, the lawsuit names other administration officials as defendants, including Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
PBS says its technology is used as a backup for the nationwide wireless emergency alert system.
The administration has fought with several media organizations.
Government-run news services like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty are struggling for their lives, The Associated Press has battled with the White House over press access and the Federal Communications Commission is investigating television news divisions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
11 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Can Trump Tackle US 'Chronic Disease Crisis'? Experts Weigh In
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s vow to "Make America Healthy Again" could fall short when it comes to chronic disease, experts have warned. When the MAHA Commission report on chronic disease came out in May, President Donald Trump made it clear his administration was committed to tackling the epidemic "We will not stop until we defeat the chronic disease epidemic in America, we're going to get it done for the first time ever," said Trump during a MAHA event at the White House on May . In a statement included in the press release accompanying the report, Kennedy Jr. said: "We will end the childhood chronic disease crisis by attacking its root causes head-on—not just managing its symptoms." Nearly 130 million Americans are estimated to have at least one form of chronic disease, which could be heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity or hypertension, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Experts told Newsweek that, while the Trump administration's ambition to "defeat" the "epidemic" is clear, whether its policies will help or hinder chronic-disease patients remains to be seen. On one hand, Kennedy Jr.'s recent MAHA report, which detailed what the administration believed to be the leading causes of chronic disease in children, indicated the aim was to reduce the prevalence of chronic conditions through public education and research. On the other hand, the proposed cuts to Medicaid funding and work requirements for eligibility to the benefits, which are set to come as part of the broader GOP budget bill, could leave many with chronic disease without access to vital care. As many as three in four adults enrolled in Medicaid report having one or more chronic conditions, and many are unable to work the hours needed to meet the new eligibility requirements, according to nonprofit health policy research and news organization, KFF. So, while some may be medically exempt, others will lose their health coverage, meaning their conditions could worsen without access to care. Newsweek has contacted the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) via email on Tuesday. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/Canva Tackling Chronic Disease Since he became health secretary, Kennedy Jr. has promised to increase research in the root causes of illness and ensure the American diet is full of high-quality foods, while limiting access to ultra-processed food and certain chemicals, which he believes are contributors to chronic disease. The report states that consumption of ultra-processed foods "has gone up at an exponential rate as share of the American diet." Earlier in the year, Kennedy, had described products from companies like Kellogg's and McDonald's as "mass poison to children." Prioritizing research on the issue is crucial, Kenneth E. Thorpe, a professor of health policy at Emory University, Georgia, and honorary chair of the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD), told Newsweek. "Renewed focus on chronic disease and the impact that the U.S. diet has on it—focusing on artificial or chemical ingredients in food, particularly the impact of ultra processed foods—is important," he said. He added that this was because of the fact diet has "a direct impact on the growing rates of chronic conditions like obesity and obesity-related comorbidities such diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancers and many more." "I applaud the Trump administration's focus on addressing the number one cause of death and disability in the U.S.—chronic, non-communicable disease," said Thorpe, who has been an advocate of chronic disease prevention in the U.S. for over 30 years. "We have more people with more chronic diseases, with just 5 percent of the population accounting for 50 percent of the costs in health care." He added that it is estimated that from 2016 to 2030 the cost of chronic disease will be in excess of $42 trillion. "The time is now to focus on the prevention and better management of chronic disease," Thorpe added. What Should the Trump Administration Do While it's too early to tell if the Trump administration is heading down the right path to lower chronic disease prevalence, Dr. Adrian Hernandez, director of the Duke Clinical Research Institute at the Duke University School of Medicine, told Newsweek that "leading indicators appear to be going the wrong way." He said this was partly because of the changes being proposed to the National Institutes of Health (NIH). A proposal for the HHS, most of which was reported on in April, reduces by almost 40 percent its budget for 2026 and reveals major funding cuts for the NIH, according to CNN. Newsweek has contacted the NIH via email on Tuesday. Hernandez added that changes, such as the proposed cuts in federal funding, to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) were also going down the wrong path. Rather than cuts to these federal health agencies, Hernandez said tackling chronic disease will require "an investment" in science and health. He said that the same was needed for health care delivery models like Medicaid and Medicare—rather than making cuts to the programs, the administration should "invest in preventative health." The GOP budget bill, which is progressing through the legislative ranks, instructs the committee to reduce the Department of Health and Human Services budget by $880 billion over 10 years, which would include cuts to Medicaid alongside other measures such as implementing work requirements. Ross Brownson, director of the Prevention Research Center at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, told Newsweek that Medicaid cuts would "likely have a detrimental effect on chronic disease risk among the most vulnerable populations," adding Medicaid-enrolled adults have significantly higher rates of chronic disease than individuals privately insured. "The drive to defeat chronic disease stalls if Medicaid patients are placed in the backseat," Thorpe said. "Today, the federal program is far from perfect, but it is a lifeline for those who need it," Thorpe added, saying it was "often the only pathway to care" for many with chronic disease. 'A Long-Term Challenge' Experts insist that chronic disease is a deeply complex issue that requires long-term solutions and attention. Brownson noted that there has been "sparse attention to physical inactivity and tobacco use," as major risk factors for chronic disease. "This is a two-edged sword," Brownson told Newsweek. He said that while "on one hand, labeling this issue a crisis implies a sense of urgency and may mobilize action." Ultimately "the jury is still out on whether they will solve the chronic disease crisis." "We often have a short attention span and with this crisis label, policy makers may think the problem can be solved quickly and then move on to a new issue. We need to think of this as a long-term challenge in need of attention," he added.
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A soccer mystery: Why mighty China fails at the world's biggest sport
Li Tie, then head coach of the Chinese national soccer team, looks on during a training session in Shanghai, China on May 11, 2020.(Chinatopix via AP) FILE - Japan's Takumi Minamino and China's Liu Yangyi compete for the ball during a World Cup and AFC Asian Qualifier between Japan and China at Saitama Stadium 2002 in Saitama, north of Tokyo, on Sept. 5, 2024. (AP Photo/Shuji Kajiyama, File) FIEL - Then Vice President Xi Jinping of the People's Republic of China kicks a football during visit to Croke Park Stadium, Dublin, Ireland on Feb. 19, 2012. (AP Photo/Brendan Moran, Pool, File) A Booster T1 robot from Booster Robotics prepares to kick a football during a demonstration to the Zhongguancun Forum at the Zhongguancun International Innovation Center in Beijing, China, on March 28, 2025. (AP Photo/Ng Han Guan) FILE - A Chinese soccer fan cheers for his team before their AFC Asian Cup group A soccer match against Qatar in Doha, Qatar, on Jan. 12, 2011. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar, File) FILE - A Chinese soccer fan cheers for his team before their AFC Asian Cup group A soccer match against Qatar in Doha, Qatar, on Jan. 12, 2011. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar, File) Li Tie, then head coach of the Chinese national soccer team, looks on during a training session in Shanghai, China on May 11, 2020.(Chinatopix via AP) FILE - Japan's Takumi Minamino and China's Liu Yangyi compete for the ball during a World Cup and AFC Asian Qualifier between Japan and China at Saitama Stadium 2002 in Saitama, north of Tokyo, on Sept. 5, 2024. (AP Photo/Shuji Kajiyama, File) FIEL - Then Vice President Xi Jinping of the People's Republic of China kicks a football during visit to Croke Park Stadium, Dublin, Ireland on Feb. 19, 2012. (AP Photo/Brendan Moran, Pool, File) A Booster T1 robot from Booster Robotics prepares to kick a football during a demonstration to the Zhongguancun Forum at the Zhongguancun International Innovation Center in Beijing, China, on March 28, 2025. (AP Photo/Ng Han Guan) FILE - A Chinese soccer fan cheers for his team before their AFC Asian Cup group A soccer match against Qatar in Doha, Qatar, on Jan. 12, 2011. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar, File) In April, Chinese President Xi Jinping visited a company that makes humanoid robots. There he floated an idea to fix the country's woeful men's soccer team. 'Can we have robots join the team?' Xi was quoted as saying on the website of Zhiyuan Robotics. Advertisement It might be too late. China will be out of World Cup qualifying if it fails to beat Indonesia on Thursday. Even a victory may only delay the departure. What's the problem? China has 1.4 billion people, the globe's second largest economy and won 40 Olympic gold medals last year in Paris to tie the United States. Why can't it find 11 elite men's soccer players? How soccer explains a bit of China The government touches every aspect of life in China. That top-down control has helped China become the largest manufacturer of everything from electronics to shoes to steel. It has tried to run soccer, but that rigid governance hasn't worked. Advertisement 'What soccer reflects is the social and political problems of China," Zhang Feng, a Chinese journalist and commentator, tells The Associated Press. "It's not a free society. It doesn't have the team-level trust that allows players to pass the ball to each other without worrying.' Zhang argues that politics has stalled soccer's growth. And there's added pressure since Xi's a big fan and has promised to resuscitate the game at home. Soccer is a world language with its 'own grammar,' says Zhang, and China doesn't speak it. 'In China, the more emphasis the leader places on soccer, the more nervous the society gets, the more power the bureaucrats get, and the more corrupt they become," Zhang adds. Xi Jinping's dream — or nightmare? Advertisement After China defeated Thailand 2-1 in 2023, Xi joked with Srettha Thavisin, the Thai prime minister at the time. "I feel luck was a big part of it,' Xi said. The consensus is clear. China has too few quality players at the grass roots, too much political interference from the Communist Party, and there's too much corruption in the local game. Wang Xiaolei, another prominent Chinese commentator, suggests that soccer clashes with China's top-down governance and the emphasis on rote learning. 'What are we best at? Dogma," Wang wrote in a blog last year. 'But football cannot be dogmatic. What are we worst at? Inspiring ingenuity, and cultivating passion.' Advertisement Soccer is bigger than China The latest chapter in China's abysmal men's soccer history was a 7-0 loss last year to geopolitical rival Japan. 'The fact that this defeat can happen and people aren't that surprised — despite the historical animosity — just illustrates the problems facing football in China," says Cameron Wilson, a Scot who has worked in China for 20 years and written extensively about the game there. China has qualified for only one men's World Cup. That was 2002 when it went scoreless and lost all three matches. Soccer's governing body FIFA places China at No. 94 in its rankings — behind war-torn Syria and ahead of No. 95 Benin. Advertisement For perspective: Iceland is the smallest country to reach the World Cup. Its latest population estimate is almost 400,000. The website Soccerway tracks global football and doesn't show a single Chinese player in a top European league. The national team's best player is forward Wu Lei, who played for three seasons in Spain's La Liga for Espanyol. The club's majority owner in Chinese. The 2026 World Cup will have a field of 48 teams, a big increase on the 32 in 2022, yet China still might not make it. China will be eliminated from qualification if it loses to Indonesia. Even if it wins, China must also beat Bahrain on June 10 to have any hope of advancing to Asia's next qualifying stage. Advertisement An outsider views Chinese soccer Englishman Rowan Simons has spent almost 40 years in China and gained fame doing television commentary in Chinese on English Premier League matches. He also wrote the 2008 book 'Bamboo Goalposts.' China is benefiting from reforms over the last decade that placed soccer in schools. But Simons argues that soccer culture grows from volunteers, civil society and club organizations, none of which can flourish in China since they are possible challengers to the rule of the Communist Party. 'In China at the age of 12 or 13, when kids go to middle school, it's known as the cliff,' he says. "Parents may allow their kids to play sports when they're younger, but as soon as it comes to middle school the academic pressure is on — things like sport go by the wayside.' Advertisement To be fair, the Chinese women's team has done better than the men. China finished runner-up in the 1999 Women's World Cup but has faded as European teams have surged with built-in expertise from the men's game. Spain won the 2023 Women's World Cup. China was knocked out early, battered 6-1 by England in group play. China has been successful targeting Olympic sports, some of which are relatively obscure and rely on repetitive training more than creativity. Olympic team sports like soccer offer only one medal. So, like many countries, China focuses on sports with multiple medals. In China's case it's diving, table tennis and weightlifting. 'For young people, there's a single value — testing well,' says Zhang, the commentator and journalist. "China would be OK if playing soccer were only about bouncing the ball 1,000 times." The face of corruption Advertisement Li Tie, the national team coach for about two years beginning in January 2020, was last year sentenced to 20 years in prison for bribery and match fixing. Other top administrators have also been accused of corruption. The graft also extended to the domestic Super League. Clubs spent millions — maybe billions — on foreign talents backed by many state-owned businesses and, before the collapse of the housing boom, real-estate developers. The poster child was Guangzhou Evergrande. The eight-time Super League champions, once coached by Italian Marcello Lippi, was expelled from the league and disbanded earlier this year, unable to pay off its debts. Zhang says businessmen invested in professional soccer teams as a 'political tribute" and cited Hui Ka-yan. The embattled real estate developer financed the Guangzhou Evergrande Football Club and used soccer to win favor from politicians. Advertisement Property giant Evergrande has amassed debts reported at $300 billion, reflective of China's battered property segment and the general health of the economy. 'China's failure at the international level and corruption throughout the game, these are all factors that lead parents away from letting their kids get involved,' says Simons, who founded a youth soccer club called China Club Football FC. 'Parents look at what's going on and question if they want their kids to be involved. It's sad and frustrating.' ___ Wade reported from Tokyo and Tang from Washington. ___ AP soccer:
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Myth of Trumpian Deterrence
EVER SINCE DONALD TRUMP RETURNED to the White House, the darnedest thing has been happening in Ukraine. Every day or so, Trump says Russia wouldn't have attacked Ukraine if he were president. And every time he says it, Russia attacks Ukraine. You might have thought that by now, Trump would stop saying it, since Russia's continuing onslaught makes a mockery of his boasts. But he's no more fazed by this falsification than he is by the evidence that he lost the 2020 election. He just keeps repeating his story. In March, Trump proposed a 30-day ceasefire. Ukraine accepted the proposal, but Russia didn't. Russian forces pushed into eastern Ukraine, and on April 13, Russia fired missiles into Sumy, a Ukrainian city, killing at least 34 civilians and injuring more than 100. When reporters asked Trump about the missile strike, he excused it as 'a mistake' and said the war had started only because Vladimir Putin 'had so little respect for [Joe] Biden.' 'If I were president,' said Trump, 'that war would have never started.' The next day, Trump claimed that in his first term, he had deterred Putin from invading Ukraine. 'I told him, 'Don't do it,'' said Trump. But now that Trump was back in office, Putin seemed strangely undeterred. While Trump was touting his magical ability to rein in Putin, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov repeated that Russia wouldn't accept Trump's ceasefire plan. Meanwhile, along the front, Russian troops continued their assaults on Ukraine. On April 17, Trump bragged again that he had deterred Russia in his first term. 'I spoke to President Putin about it a lot,' said Trump. 'There's no way he would've ever gone in if I were president.' The next day, Russia fired missiles into Kharkiv, killing a civilian and injuring more than 100 others. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky proposed a moratorium on strikes against civilian targets. Putin rejected it. On April 22, in an interview with Time, Trump was pressed about a promise he had made in his 2024 campaign. 'You said you would end the war in Ukraine on Day One,' the interviewer reminded him. Trump dismissed the quote. 'I said that as an exaggeration,' he scoffed. 'Obviously, people know that when I said that, it was said in jest.' But he repeated that the war 'would have never happened if I was president.' Support our independent political journalism by signing up for a free or paid Bulwark subscription. Again, Putin defied him. A day after the Time interview, Russia launched a missile and drone barrage against Kyiv, hitting five neighborhoods and killing a dozen people. Trump, in response, tried to do what he claimed to have done in his first term: talk Putin out of further aggression. 'Vladimir, STOP!' he wrote on Truth Social. 'Lets [sic] get the Peace Deal DONE!' Despite Russia's persistent bombardment, Trump insisted that Putin wanted peace: Reporter: This proposal that you put on the table, it's a 30-day ceasefire proposal. Your national security team presented it to both Ukraine and Russia. Two months ago, Ukraine agreed to that ceasefire proposal immediately. Russia has not. And my question is: Is Russia the obstacle to peace. . . . Trump: I don't think so. I think that they both want peace right now. Again, Trump said the war 'would have never happened if I were president,' since Putin 'understood that I would not be happy' if Russia were to attack Ukraine. The next day, April 25, Trump announced, 'Work on the overall Peace Deal between Russia and Ukraine is going smoothly.' He added, 'They are very close to a deal. . . . Most of the major points are agreed to.' No such deal materialized. Four days later, as Russian forces continued to advance, another Putin mouthpiece—Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chair of the Russian Security Council—declared that the only acceptable outcome of the war was the destruction of Ukraine's government. Share In an interview on April 29, Trump assured ABC's Terry Moran, 'Because of me, I do believe that he's [Putin] willing to stop the fighting.' Moran was incredulous: 'You think Vladimir Putin wants peace?' Trump stood by his man: 'I think he does, yes. I think he does.' On May 2, Trump told NBC's Kristen Welker that his magic chemistry with Putin was already working. 'If I didn't get involved, they [Russia] would be fighting right now for all of Ukraine,' said Trump. 'If it weren't me, they would keep going.' But Russia did keep going. From one town to another, its troops continued to advance. On May 6, a reporter asked Trump 'what type of progress' his overtures to Putin had achieved. 'A lot,' said Trump. 'I think Russia wanted to take all of Ukraine, and they've stopped.' They hadn't stopped. Again, Trump proposed an unconditional ceasefire. And again, the Kremlin rejected it, insisting on impossible conditions. Trump responded by welcoming Russia's demands and shifting the burden to Ukraine. 'President Putin of Russia doesn't want to have a Cease Fire Agreement with Ukraine, but rather wants to meet on Thursday, in Turkey, to negotiate a possible end to the BLOODBATH,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'Ukraine should agree to this, IMMEDIATELY.' Trump refused to punish Russia. On May 12, a reporter asked him whether he would impose 'sanctions on Russia if Putin doesn't agree with the 30-day ceasefire.' Trump reaffirmed his faith in Putin's regime: 'I have a feeling they're going to agree. I do. I have a feeling.' Share The Bulwark They didn't. Zelensky offered to meet with Putin in Istanbul, but Putin spurned the invitation. Again, Trump made excuses for Putin. 'Nothing's going to happen until Putin and I get together,' Trump told reporters. 'And obviously, he wasn't going to go.' On May 16, Fox News host Bret Baier reminded Trump: 'You said, 'Stop bombing.' He [Putin] hasn't stopped bombing. He's not at the table.' But Trump—with the same delusional confidence he routinely expresses about massive fraud in the 2020 election—insisted, 'He is at the table.' Throughout the interview, Trump tried to shift blame to Zelensky. The next day, Russia launched its biggest drone attack of the three-year war. On May 19, Trump had a two-hour phone call with Putin. 'The tone and spirit of the conversation were excellent,' Trump declared on Truth Social. As a result, he promised, 'Russia and Ukraine will immediately start negotiations toward a Ceasefire.' The ceasefire didn't happen. Instead, last week, Russia launched more than 300 drones and missiles into Ukraine, killing more civilians. By this point, it was clear that Trump's boasts about deterring Putin were empty. 'He doesn't seem willing to do anything that you want him to do,' a reporter told Trump. 'Do you still believe that, that he wouldn't have launched the war?' Trump clung to his intertwined myths: 'If I were president—if the election weren't rigged—you wouldn't have had the war.' Join now THE SADDEST THING about Trump's Ukraine delusion is that he really could have deterred Putin from extending or escalating the war. But that would have required action, not braggadocio. At every turn, Trump refused to antagonize the dictator he thought was his friend. Last Wednesday, after another barrage of Russian missiles and drones, a reporter asked Trump, 'What stopped you from imposing new sanctions on Russia?' Trump answered that peace might be at hand. 'If I think I'm close to getting a deal,' he explained, 'I don't want to screw it up by doing that.' Then, on Friday, Fox News reporter Peter Doocy tried to ask Trump about the challenges of dealing with 'a very stubborn Vladimir Putin.' Trump, offended that Putin was being singled out, interrupted the question. 'And Zelensky,' Trump added. 'Very stubborn Zelensky, too.' What Trump doesn't understand is that the world's crises and tragedies—the war in Ukraine, the war in Gaza, the October 2023 massacre in Israel, the plight of Afghans abandoned by the United States—aren't a stage for his ego. He treats these scenes of suffering as opportunities to promote himself, by crowing that if he had been president, they never would have happened. He doesn't understand that being president is a job, and the job is to alleviate crises, not exploit them. Putin recognizes that this is how Trump thinks. He knows that the American president, while yapping that the war never would have happened on his watch, won't lift a finger against the aggressor. And that's why the war goes on. Zip this article to a friend's inbox or zap it onto social media. Share
