2026年3月31日 美国东部时间下午3:01 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
华盛顿讯 一名联邦法官周二裁定，特朗普总统的行政令中剥夺美国国家公共广播电台（NPR）与公共广播电视公司（PBS）联邦拨款的部分内容违反第一修正案，该指令试图因特朗普不喜欢两家新闻机构的报道而对其进行惩罚。
美国地区法官伦道夫·莫斯永久阻止特朗普政府执行特朗普今年5月签署的行政令中的两项条款，该条款要求所有联邦机构切断对NPR和PBS的拨款。
“信息十分明确：NPR和PBS无需申请任何联邦资助，因为总统不赞成他们‘左翼’的新闻报道，”莫斯在一份长达62页的判决书中写道。
莫斯表示，该指令违宪，因为第一修正案“绝不允许”此类基于观点的歧视和报复行为。
特朗普及其共和党盟友长期以来一直批评NPR和PBS，称其存在针对保守派的偏见报道。特朗普去年曾宣称，这两家新闻机构是“激进左翼民主党党的喉舌”。
除了要求联邦机构终止对PBS和NPR的拨款外，特朗普的行政令还要求为两家新闻机构提供公共资金的公共广播公司终止对它们的资助。去年，国会通过了一项立法法案，特朗普将其签署为法律，该法案在2026和2027财年从公共广播公司追回约10亿美元拨款。
在该项拨款追回之后，该公司去年8月表示将开始清算，并于上个月提交了解散文件。
但根据法庭文件，特朗普的行政令涵盖所有联邦机构，美国国家艺术基金会、联邦紧急事务管理局和教育部随后取消了授予PBS和NPR的拨款。
NPR和PBS以及多家附属电台于5月底对特朗普及其政府提起诉讼，质疑其行政令的合法性。美国司法部曾辩称，总统有权决定资助哪些言论，因此他下令联邦机构终止对PBS和NPR拨款的行为是在其权限范围内行事。
但莫斯在判决中驳回了司法部的论点，并表示特朗普的行政令越过了第一修正案的红线，该修正案禁止政府动用包括财政权在内的权力惩罚其不喜欢的言论。
他表示，该项指令“既未定义或规范政府言论的内容，也未确保联邦项目的合规性。它也未制定适用于所有联邦拨款项目申请者的中立且相关的标准。相反，它专门针对两家言论机构，并基于其言论禁止它们参与所有联邦资助项目。”
莫斯认定，只要特朗普的行政令仍然有效，仅基于总统不喜欢其报道内容，NPR和PBS就无法获得原本符合资格的拨款，并指出总统的指令试图因两家机构过往的言论而对其进行惩罚。
“很难想象有比这更明确的证据能证明，政府行为的目标正是总统不喜欢的观点，并试图压制这些观点，”他写道。“该行政令试图将NPR和PBS排除在获得联邦拨款或其他资助之外，原因是他们对他的政治对手的报道比对其所在政党和盟友的报道更正面，原因是在他看来他们的新闻报道偏向左翼，还因为他们曾批评过他。”
法官补充道，“毫无疑问”，特朗普的举措针对的正是NPR和PBS，因为他认为其报道对他本人和共和党不利。
“诚然，总统有权批评这条或任何其他报道，也可以自由表达自己的观点，”莫斯写道。“但他不得动用政府权力指示联邦机构，因原告发表了他不喜欢的言论而报复性地将他们排除在获得联邦拨款或其他资助之外。”
公共广播削减与农村地区
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/public-broadcasting-funding-cuts-could-lead-to-news-blackouts-in-rural-areas/
公共广播拨款削减可能导致农村地区出现新闻盲区
(03:03)
Judge rules Trump’s directive cutting off funding for NPR and PBS violates the First Amendment
2026-03-31 3:01 PM EDT / CBS News
Washington — A federal judge ruled Tuesday that parts of President Trump’s executive order stripping National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service of federal funding violated the First Amendment by seeking to punish the two news outlets for speech he dislikes.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss permanently blocked the Trump administration from enforcing two provisions of an executive order Mr. Trump signed in May, which directed all federal agencies to cut off funding to NPR and PBS.
“The message is clear: NPR and PBS need not apply for any federal benefit because the President disapproves of their ‘left wing’ coverage of the news,” Moss wrote in a 62-page decision.
Moss wrote that the directive is unconstitutional because the First Amendment “does not tolerate” that kind of viewpoint discrimination and retaliation.
Mr. Trump and his Republican allies have long criticized NPR and PBS over what they claim is bias reporting against conservatives. The president claimed last year that the news outlets are “arms of the Radical Left Democrat Party.”
In addition to directing federal agencies to terminate funding to PBS and NPR, Mr. Trump’s executive order called for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provided public dollars to the two news outlets, to cease funding to them. Last year, Congress passed, and Mr. Trump signed into law, a legislative package that clawed back about $1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for fiscal years 2026 and 2027.
On the heels of that rescission, the corporation said last August it would begin winding down its operations and last month filed Articles of Dissolution.
But the president’s executive order covered all federal agencies, and the National Endowment for the Arts, FEMA and the Department of Education went on to cancel grants awarded to PBS and NPR, according to court papers.
NPR and PBS, as well as several member stations, filed their lawsuits against Mr. Trump and his administration in late May challenging the legality of his executive order. The Justice Department has argued that the president acted within his authority when he ordered federal agencies to end funding for PBS and NPR because he has the right to decide what speech to fund.
But in his decision, Moss rejected the Justice Department’s arguments and wrote that the president’s executive order crosses a First Amendment line that bars the government from using its power, including the power of the purse, to punish speech it dislikes.
The measure, he said, “does not define or regulate the content of government speech or ensure compliance with a federal program. Nor does it set neutral and germane criteria that apply to all applicants for a federal grant program. Instead, it singles out two speakers and, on the basis of their speech, bars them from all federally funded programs.”
Moss found that for as long as Mr. Trump’s order is in effect, NPR and PBS cannot be considered for grants that they would otherwise be eligible for based only on the president’s dislike of their coverage, and wrote that the president’s directive seeks to punish the two outlets for their past speech.
“It is difficult to conceive of clearer evidence that a government action is targeted at viewpoints that the President does not like and seeks to squelch,” he wrote. “The Executive Order seeks to exclude NPR and PBS from receiving federal grants or other funding because they have provided more positive coverage of his political opponents than of his party and allies, because their news coverage, in his view, tips left, and because they were critical of him.”
The judge added that “there can be no doubt” that Mr. Trump’s measure targets NPR and PBS because he believes their coverage is unfavorable to him and the Republican Party.
“To be sure, the President is entitled to criticize this or any other reporting, and he can express his own views as he sees fit,” Moss wrote. “He may not, however, use his governmental power to direct federal agencies to exclude Plaintiffs from receiving federal grants or other funding in retaliation for saying things that he does not like.”
Public broadcasting cuts and rural areas
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/public-broadcasting-funding-cuts-could-lead-to-news-blackouts-in-rural-areas/
Public broadcasting funding cuts could lead to news blackouts in rural areas
(03:03)
发表回复