Stay Tuned with Preet Trump v. The Press (with Erwin Chemerinsky)
14 snips
Dec 9, 2025 
Erwin Chemerinsky, a distinguished constitutional law scholar and dean at UC Berkeley School of Law, joins the discussion on the intersection of the First Amendment and presidential power. He dives into how Trump's lawsuits may intimidate the press, potentially chilling critical reporting. Chemerinsky contrasts U.S. speech protections with those in Europe and clarifies the blurred lines between speech and press rights. The conversation also touches on the New York Times's challenge to the Pentagon's restrictive press agreement, highlighting contemporary issues in media freedom.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Litigation As A Tool To Intimidate Media
- Erwin Chemerinsky argues that Trump's lawsuits against major media outlets function to intimidate and chill unfavorable reporting.
- Settlements by ABC, Meta, Paramount, and others can suppress stories the public never learns about and thus damage press freedom.
Restricting Unpopular Speech Is Historical
- Chemerinsky says the impulse to limit speech people dislike is a recurring theme in U.S. history.
- He links current administration actions to past efforts like wartime suppression and university hate-speech codes.
U.S. Speech Protections Versus Europe
- The United States protects speech more robustly than most Western nations.
- European countries commonly ban hate speech, a practice largely incompatible with U.S. First Amendment doctrine.
