A federal judge on Friday denied a request to block the Pentagon from terminating three employees of Stars and Stripes, a U.S. military newspaper. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden turned down the request for a preliminary injunction filed by publisher Max Lederer, editor-in-chief Erik Slavin, and reporter Lara Korte. The judge found that the government likely did not violate the employees' First Amendment rights when it moved to fire them.
The dispute stems from the editorial independence of the newspaper, which receives partial government funding. The three staff members filed a lawsuit alleging their terminations were retaliation for speaking publicly about threats to the outlet's independence. The lawsuit followed a July interview with "CBS Sunday Morning," in which Korte stated she worked for Stars and Stripes rather than the Pentagon or any administration.
According to termination notices, the Pentagon accused Korte and Slavin of insubordination based on their comments in the CBS interview. Lederer was told he would be dismissed for refusing to fire the two journalists and for making his own public comments. The journalists contend the firings were actually triggered by an August 11 story regarding the mental health of sailors on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln during a deployment in the Persian Gulf.
During court proceedings, Justice Department attorneys argued that the journalists were commenting on their work and criticized their employer, which they claimed is not protected speech. Assistant U.S. Attorney Brett Covington noted that a social media post by Korte regarding the firings received over 4 million views, suggesting their speech was not being hampered. Judge McFadden, a Trump appointee, expressed skepticism regarding the First Amendment claims, noting that because the journalists received approval from supervisors to conduct the interview, their comments might be considered official government speech.
The scale of the impact involves the employment status of three senior staff members and the editorial direction of a newspaper that serves military personnel. While a specific dollar figure for the newspaper's total budget was not reported, the outlet relies on a combination of taxpayer funds and advertising. For the individual employees, the ruling in favor of the Pentagon means the dismissals can proceed following a reprieve that expired on September 4.
The day-to-day change for readers could involve a shift in the news they receive. Sean Parnell, an assistant to the Secretary of Defense, has stated the department intends to "modernize" the paper to focus on "all things military" rather than "DC gossip columns." The journalists stated the Pentagon hoped to stop the outlet from syndicating content from the Associated Press or the Washington Post, which they said is currently a source of news for service members in remote locations who lack internet access. A final decision on the merits of the lawsuit will determine the permanent status of the employees. The case continues to work its way through the federal court system following the denial of the injunction.