Judge orders Trump administration to explain why order to restore Voice of America wasn't followed
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth of the District of Columbia gave the administration until Aug. 13 to explain how it will get VOA working again. The outlet that dates back to World War II has been largely dark since March.
Lamberth said the administration needs to show what it is doing with the $260 million Congress appropriated for VOA's operations this year.
Kari Lake, the adviser appointed by Trump to run the government news agencies, said in June that 85% of employees at VOA and its overseers at the U.S. Agency for Global Media had lost their jobs. She called it a 'long overdue effort to dismantle a bloated, unaccountable bureaucracy.'
Lamberth said there's a process for eliminating funding that had previously been appropriated — Congress must vote on it, as it recently did for NPR and PBS funding. But that hasn't happened here, he said.
He scolded the administration for providing 'cagey answers' and omitting key information when asked for it in previous court orders.
'Without more explanation, the court is left to conclude that the defendants are simply trying to run out the clock on the fiscal year, without putting the money Congress appropriated toward the purposes Congress intended,' Lamberth wrote. 'The legal term for that is 'waste.''
There was no immediate comment from the White House.
___
David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Law journal article proves that citizen ballot questions are under attack
If you've ever suffered from that nagging feeling that the Legislature is systematically trying to undermine your right to petition something onto the ballot, you're not alone. I've had it, too. We need to start trusting that gut feeling. It turns out we weren't wrong. That's exactly what the Republican majority in the Legislature has been trying to do. It has just been proven by three authors of a South Dakota Law Review article: 'Have Recent Legislative Changes in South Dakota Made Using the Initiated Measure Process More Difficult?' It seems the answer to the question in the title of the article is yes, and how. You can find the article on the Law Review's website. Be warned: at 40-some pages, it's not an easy read. There are footnotes strewn about and readers may struggle with some of the world's ugliest charts. However it still tells a compelling tale of how, since 2017, the Republican super-majority in the Legislature has been whittling away at the rights of citizens to petition measures onto the ballot. Republicans may scoff at the article as so much whining from the left as two of the authors are well-known Democrats: activist Cory Heidelberger and former State Sen. Reynold Nesiba. While a Republican byline would have been nice for the sake of balance, there's no disputing the truth of the facts they have compiled. These bills were filed and are there for anyone to look up. Their paper gets particularly interesting when it goes about listing the Legislature's 14 worst bills designed to cut back the rights of citizens to petition an initiative onto the ballot. Those range from insisting on a larger font size on petitions to make them unwieldy, to allowing petition signers to later withdraw their names after the petition has been submitted, and a couple of attempts to raise the vote total needed for passage of the initiative beyond a simple majority. Some of these attacks on our rights were defeated at the ballot box; some were challenged in court where they fell short of being entirely constitutional. Sadly, some were enacted into law. At least now, through the work of the article's authors, the grim history of the war on ballot initiatives in South Dakota is summed up in one place. Unfortunately, while that history has been chronicled, the siege still continues. The authors go on to mention seven petition-related bills and five constitutional amendments submitted in the 2025 legislative session, 10 of which, they say, sought to curtail the rights of citizens to initiate ballot measures. When legislators want to amend the state constitution themselves, they have to convince a majority of their colleagues to send the amendment to voters. This legislative quest to get on the 2026 ballot through constitutional amendments comes from the same party that tries to curtail voter access to the petition process by claiming that voters have ballot fatigue with so many issues to decide on Election Day. This ignores the fact that in each case, more than 17,000 South Dakotans applied their signatures to petitions, a sure sign that there are plenty of people who think the ballot issue is something that should go before voters. This years-long attempt to curtail the initiative process is nothing more than a means for the Republican super-majority to solidify its power by cutting off people they don't agree with from access to the ballot. Republican efforts aren't trying to make the process better or more secure. They're just tired of beating back attempts to legalize marijuana and abortion. The irony here is that in the Statehouse, no piece of legislation is ever blocked. Sure, there may be some arm-twisting that could lead to a bill being tabled or withdrawn, but each bill is handled in the light of day. These same Republicans who are so upright and transparent with legislation are working overtime to have darkness descend on the ballot box. Their attempts to slow or stop citizen access to the ballot initiative process is a sign of the power that citizens wield. The recent law journal article has proven that this notion that our rights are under attack is more than just a gut feeling. We now have a historic record that spells out the way Republicans have been trying to take away the power of citizens to petition their government. This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Law journal article proves that citizen ballot questions are under attack
Fox News
28 minutes ago
- Fox News
DAVID MARCUS: Bring back the Redskins, and everything else torn down by wokeness
There was a rare bit of good news out of the nation's capital this week with a report that the owners of Washington's NFL team are seriously considering President Donald Trump's demand to restore the name "Redskins." It was back in 2020, a year of abject and bizarre societal madness, that the Redskins became the Washington Football Team, and eventually the Commanders, out of concern that "Redskin" is an offensive term. Never mind that poll after poll shows actual American Indians do not object to it. It wasn't just the Redskins. In the wake of the woke madness of 2020, statues were toppled all over the country. Of course, it started with Confederate monuments, which were low-hanging fruit, but soon statues of Christopher Columbus and Teddy Roosevelt were also falling. Perhaps the best, or worst, example was the removal of the Emancipation Memorial in Boston. This was a statue of Abraham Lincoln freeing a slave, erected in 1879, the design of which was literally paid for by freed slaves. The intergalactic hubris of the officials in Boston, who thought they knew better how to celebrate the end of slavery than actual slaves, shows exactly why the memorials and names excised by wokeness must all return. The Left believes firmly that the arc of history bends towards their preferences, and that "social justice" is a one-way ratchet, that their victories cannot be undone. But in fact, there is no reason we have to accept that. What 2020 showed us was that the iconoclastic impulse to destroy the images and symbols of a society is insatiable. No sooner do they ruin one sacred idol than they move onto the next one and the next one, until mothers are called birthing people. Had there been any kind of rational process in 2020 to determine what monuments should stay or go, we might have been able to reach considered compromises on the most questionable: The Cleveland Indians and Nathan Bedford Forrest are not the same. But that didn't happen. Instead, we saw mass hysteria, from the mob, the state, and corporations. Pull down the statues first, ask questions never, was the order of the day. This is why, for Americans to truly heal from the wound that was 2020, not just its avalanche of wokeness, but also the draconian COVID lockdowns that accompanied it, we need to hit the reset button and bring back what we so carelessly destroyed. Five years from now, on a chilly Sunday, with their team losing to the Eagles, Washington fans should be able to say, "Remember how we stopped calling them the Redskins? That was stupid," and know that a wrong has been righted. Likewise, if on a spring day in Gotham, New Yorkers can once again tip their hat to the once-toppled Teddy Roosevelt statue, then they too will know that we are the makers of history, not just passengers along for the inevitable Marxist ride. The urge to destroy monuments and names is nothing new. In Ancient Egypt we call it damnatio memoriae when one Pharoah scratched off the name of a predecessor. In the Middle Ages, we call it Iconoclasm, and it tore apart the Christian faith. Troves of knowledge and artistic treasure have been destroyed by well-intentioned people of the past, who just knew deep down, that they had to protect not just their contemporaries, but all of humanity to come, by destroying what they saw as offensive. Today, we have a choice. 2020 was only 5 years ago. We can still restore what was lost, yes, even the General Lee statue in Richmond, and then, perhaps, enter into some rational process to decide what, if any, history we wish to deprive future generations of. The message needs to be clear that when mistakes are made, our society can and will go back. Just as we went back from the "progressive" policy of letting men play in women's sports, we can go back to a time when we respected the past, instead of abhorring and eviscerating it. 2020 was a year of almost unfathomable destruction, loss of life, loss of liberty, and loss of historical monuments and names, but often, out of destruction grows renewal, and the owners of, as Trump currently puts it, the Washington Whatevers have a chance to bring that renewal to fruition. So Hail to the Redskins, and the Roosevelts and Lincolns too. Hail to Columbus and his oceans blue. This is our history, and it is time for us to reclaim it.
Wall Street Journal
28 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
A Good Plan to Keep Social Security Solvent
Andrew Biggs's 'A Risky Plan for Social Security' warns that the bipartisan reform plan to provide long-term solvency for the Social Security system proposed by Sens. Bill Cassidy (R., La.) and Tim Kaine (D., Va.) is too risky (op-ed, July 25). But the Cassidy-Kaine plan is much less risky than ignoring Social Security's current $25 trillion funding gap and allowing its trust fund to be depleted by 2033. Messrs. Cassidy and Kaine based their proposal on extensive evidence that diversified investing produces much higher long-term returns than reliance on low-yield Treasury bonds.
