Originally posted by Starlight
View Post
Trump's dealing with Acost-her was not in the slightest way an attack on the First Amendment. There is no First Amendment requirement that POTUS hold press conferences. There is no requirement that POTUS allow reporters White House access. There is no requirement that POTUS answer questions from the press in any way. When POTUS makes the voluntary choice to answer questions, there is no requirement that he call on each reporter (or, in the case of some like Acost-her, pseudo-reporter opinionators) present. There is no requirement that POTUS answer every question from those persons he does choose. There is no requirement that POTUS respond at all to "challenges," let alone do so politely.
The First Amendment protects the right to ask questions in a general sense. It does not require POTUS or anyone to answer those questions, or to provide particular venues for asking those questions. It protects the right to publish any answers received, as well as opinions about those answers, and even advocacy based on those opinions. (Ideally, the media would distinguish among reportage, opinion, and advocacy. Clear-eyed people realize that Fox, e.g., does so; they admit most of their shows are largely opinion and analysis, with the actual "journalism" coming from people like Bret Baier, Chris Wallace, Catherine Herridge, and Shannon Bream.)
Comment