A federal judge has cleared the Pentagon to fire three Stars and Stripes journalists after rejecting their request to halt the terminations, a move their attorney warns could threaten editorial independence at the military-run news outlet.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden issued the ruling Friday in Washington, D.C., denying an injunction that would have prevented the Pentagon from firing publisher Max Lederer, editor-in-chief Erik Slavin, and reporter Lara Korte while their lawsuit challenging the dismissals continues. The decision means the Pentagon can move forward with terminating all three employees, who argue they are being punished for defending the paper’s independence and for speaking out about conditions aboard a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier.
The three journalists received separation notices and were placed on administrative leave in August, with the Pentagon citing alleged insubordination. Slavin and Korte’s alleged misconduct centered on their participation in a CBS News interview about the paper’s editorial independence, which the Pentagon claimed was conducted as part of their official duties. Lederer, the publisher, was fired after refusing to deliver the separation notices to his colleagues and attempting to resign instead.
Judge McFadden’s 24-page opinion found that the journalists' First Amendment claims were unlikely to succeed at this preliminary stage. In his ruling, he wrote, “At bottom, on the current record, Plaintiffs' real complaint seems to be that they were victims of a cruel bait-and-switch. They are being fired for giving pre-approved interviews on their paper's behalf in which they largely toed the company line.” He concluded, “Whatever else such a scheme may violate, it does not clearly offend the First Amendment.”
The judge also emphasized that Stars and Stripes’ editorial independence “is not at stake here,” rejecting the plaintiffs' arguments that the Pentagon’s actions amounted to censorship or retaliation for protected speech. The ruling aligns with previous Supreme Court guidance that government employees speaking as part of their official duties do not have the same First Amendment protections as private citizens.
The employees’ attorney, Taryn Wilgus Null, insisted that the First Amendment should still apply, arguing, “Government employees do not lose their First Amendment free speech rights.” Null told the court that Slavin and Korte “were not acting within their ordinary job duties” during the CBS interview and that their comments were made as sources, not as representatives of Stars and Stripes. She also noted that the Pentagon’s allegations of insubordination followed the journalists’ public defense of the outlet’s independence and their reporting on sensitive conditions aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln.
Korte, in an internal email, wrote that she would “rather eat glass” than allow the government to dictate her reporting, underscoring the tension between Pentagon officials and the paper’s staff. The Justice Department’s Brett Covington, representing the Pentagon, countered that the email showed Korte was concerned about her ability to perform her job, and called the connection to the Abraham Lincoln story “a red herring.” He maintained that the interviews were part of the journalists’ routine duties, not protected speech as private citizens.
Despite the setback, Null said the legal fight is far from over. As quoted in AP News, she stated, “While we are disappointed in the decision, we fully expect to prevail after we have an opportunity to take discovery and all the facts are revealed.” The lawsuit will continue, with the employees seeking to prove retaliation and violation of constitutional rights as the case moves into the discovery phase.
Stars and Stripes occupies a distinct role in American journalism. As a military-operated publication partially funded by taxpayers, it has long claimed editorial independence from Pentagon leadership and the White House. The outlet’s reporters and editors have historically viewed themselves as journalists first, not public affairs officers or government mouthpieces. This tradition, the plaintiffs argue, is what’s threatened by Pentagon intervention in newsroom personnel decisions.
Judge McFadden, however, disagreed with the idea that the Pentagon’s actions amounted to censorship or posed a broader threat to the publication’s autonomy. As Breitbart reported, he concluded: “Stars and Stripes’ editorial independence ‘is not at stake here.’” The court’s reasoning echoed the government’s position that the journalists’ challenged remarks fell within their official job responsibilities, and not as private speech protected by the First Amendment.
While Pentagon officials assert that the firings were based on insubordination, the timeline is disputed. According to the lawsuit, one day after Stars and Stripes published a critical story about deteriorating conditions aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, Pentagon officials ordered Lederer to issue separation notices to Slavin and Korte. The government, though, flatly denied any connection, describing the story as “a red herring” unrelated to the terminations.
The case raises unresolved questions about how much independence a military-run outlet can truly maintain when its funding, leadership, and personnel decisions remain under Pentagon control. For now, the court has sided with the government’s claim that the dismissals do not “clearly offend the First Amendment.” The broader lawsuit, however, remains active, and both sides expect further legal wrangling as more facts come to light.
The Pentagon’s ability to fire Stars and Stripes staffers without clear constitutional guardrails should give every taxpayer pause, because government-run news is only as independent as the officials who control it.
