In the first weeks of his return to the White House, President Donald Trump has made free speech a central theme of his administration, but critics say his actions are undermining the very freedoms he says he supports.
On May 1, Trump signed Executive Order 14290 titled “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media.” The directive orders all federal agencies to cut federal funding for National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), two of the country’s most prominent nonprofit media outlets. The administration has also called on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), a federally funded nonprofit, to end its support for NPR and PBS. Trump officials has accused both organizations of pushing “radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news.’”
The move has drawn widespread backlash from civil liberties groups, media watchdogs and legal experts, who argue that the executive order threatens the constitutional protections of free speech and press freedom enshrined in the First Amendment.
Political Science teacher Colleen Roche acknowledged that while Masters offers some protection, not all educators feel equally safe. She said, “I think at Masters, while we’re not supposed to convey our own personal political convictions, we are definitely supported in sharing personal perspectives. But I’m afraid that’s probably not true everywhere.”
NPR has launched a weeklong series titled “The State of the First Amendment: The Right From Which All Other Rights Flow” to explore growing concerns over government censorship. In interviews with teachers, scientists, students, and activists, NPR has highlighted how fears of retaliation are reshaping speech across America.
One high school history teacher told NPR she now censors herself in the classroom, fearing that discussions of certain historical events could be reported to the U.S. Department of Education through a new online complaint portal. The portal, called the “End DEI” Portal, is framed as a tool for reporting instances of “discrimination based on race or sex” in publicly funded K-12 schools. It allows parents, students, teachers and community members to submit an email address, the name of the school or district, and details of the concerning practices. The Department of Education has said it will use these resorts to guide future investigations.
Meanwhile, students and immigrants fear that protest participation or political expression could lead to surveillance, arrest or even deportation. Others, like members of far-right groups and conservative student organizations, say Trump’s return has made them feel freer to express their views without fear of backlash.
Roche said, “I’ve had international students talk to me about it, as they come and go from the country and want to keep their student visa, go to college here on a student visa. They have voiced concerns to me about what they can and can’t say. I think it’s definitely altering people’s behavior.”
Senior Rooke Wiser, who leads the Free Speech Club, described the executive order as a targeted attack. He said, “The issue with what’s been happening in the administration is this action is being targeted specifically against NPR and PBS. Personally, I see this as an attack on free speech.”
Still, the concern among journalists is mounting. The Federal Communications Commission, led by Trump-appointed Chairman Brendan Carr, has opened investigations into NPR and PBS, suggesting that some of their underwriting announcements may violate rules against commercial advertising. Critics see these investigations as part of a broader campaign, outlined in the Trump-aligned Project 2025 agenda, to defund public media and restructure federal institutions to reflect conservative priorities.
The legal stakes are high. The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 established CPB to ensure public media remains independent and insulated from political interference. Legal experts say the president does not have unilateral authority to end federal funding for these organizations, which is appropriated by Congress. Both NPR and PBS are expected to mount legal challenges against the executive order.
Internationally, press freedom monitors are sounding the alarm. Reporters Without Borders recently downgraded the United States from 45th to 55th in its global press freedom index, citing growing government hostility toward journalists. Domestically, the Committee to Protect Journalists warned that press freedom “can no longer be taken for granted” in the United States.
For Wiser, the shift isn’t just political, it’s also personal. He said, “Free Speech Club used to be about spotlighting local attacks or book challenges. Now, it’s about how we keep people safe. It’s become less of an advocacy group and more of a support network.”
For now, the future of NPR and PBS, and the broader principle of government neutrality toward the press, is uncertain. As Trump’s executive order moves through legal scrutiny, one thing is clear: the debate over who gets to speak freely in America is far from settled.
