When James Risen won his seven-year legal battle against the federal government in 2015, refusing to reveal his sources for a CIA story, media experts declared him likely the last reporter who would ever face such a subpoena. Surveillance technology, they argued, had made the government's job easier. There was no longer a need to drag journalists into court and threaten them with prison.
That prediction looks spectacularly wrong.
The Trump administration has now subpoenaed New York Times reporters in connection with a leak investigation over a story about security problems with a plane Qatar gifted to Donald Trump. The administration is not simply hunting for sources. It is weaponizing the legal system against the press itself.
The Times reported that Trump flew to a NATO summit in Turkey on the Qatar-provided aircraft but switched back to Air Force One due to security issues with the borrowed plane. Trump himself acknowledged the aircraft needed to be "maxed out." This is the sort of mundane Washington story published every day. Yet the administration claims the reporting revealed sensitive national security information.
The escalation speaks volumes. In addition to subpoenaing the reporters' phone records, the Trump administration has demanded phone records of the journalists' family members stretching back months. This is not leak investigation. This is punishment.
A Dangerous Shift in Government Tactics
Aggressive leak prosecutions are a relatively recent American phenomenon, born from the post-September 11 era. Before the Iraq war, government leak investigations rarely went anywhere. Officials would quietly shelve them without prosecuting sources or subpoenaing journalists. That changed with the 2003 Plame case, where reporters faced real threats of compelled testimony about who revealed a CIA officer's identity. The precedent normalized aggressive leak investigations across succeeding administrations.
What once appeared to be the exception has become routine. Yet the current case against the Times stands out for its transparency about its actual purpose. There is no serious national security concern here. The target is the newspaper and its reporters, full stop.
This represents exactly the danger that has always lurked in leak prosecutions: an autocratic president with a compliant Justice Department and a Congress that abdicates oversight could use the machinery of law solely to imprison journalists and punish news organizations. Trump is not hiding that goal.
The irony cuts deeper when looking at his ongoing Iran conflict. By keeping reporters away from combat operations and refusing to explain military actions to the press, Trump has created an information vacuum. The war, the first in modern times with minimal press coverage, is now the least popular military conflict on record. His assault on transparency is not just attacking the First Amendment. It is undermining his own political objectives by leaving the public without reliable information or compelling narratives to understand events.
Risen's decade-long legal fight against the government did deter officials across multiple administrations from casually subpoenaing other reporters. That deterrent effect held until now. With an autocrat in the White House, Risen's precedent no longer protects the press.
Author James Rodriguez: "Trump's move against the Times shows that predicting the death of press subpoenas was premature, and that the real target has never been finding leakers but controlling what Americans are allowed to know."
Comments