David McCraw, the lead newsroom lawyer for The New York Times, says the newspaper’s legal team is at the forefront of defending press freedom in the United States under the current Trump administration. As senior vice president and deputy general counsel, McCraw oversees a small group of in‑house attorneys who have taken on a series of high‑profile battles with the federal government.
Key victories and ongoing fights
In March, the Times won a lawsuit challenging new Pentagon policies that sought to limit reporters’ access to military facilities. Although the Department of Defense has continued to impose additional restrictions, the court ruling remains a significant win for journalists seeking unfettered coverage of defense matters.
The newspaper also rebuffed a $15 billion defamation suit filed by President Trump, and successfully blocked subpoenas demanding phone records of reporters who reported on shortcomings of the Air Force One aircraft donated by Qatar.
Why the battle matters
McCraw warns that the government appears to treat constitutional rights like a game of “whack‑a‑mole,” winning one battle only to face another. He stresses that the legal protections for the press have not changed, but the norms surrounding press access and public trust have been eroded.
According to McCraw, the erosion is evident in the decline of public confidence in news media—particularly among Republicans—since President Trump’s rise to office. This mistrust makes it easier for officials to ignore the First Amendment’s prohibition on abridging freedom of speech or the press.
Impact on local and national journalism
While large outlets like The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Associated Press and The Wall Street Journal have the resources to mount legal defenses, many smaller newspapers lack staff attorneys and must rely on limited outside counsel. McCraw notes that the shrinking of local newsrooms reduces the overall capacity to protect press freedoms, a trend that threatens the ability of all journalists to hold power accountable.
He cites historic Supreme Court cases—such as the 1964 Sullivan decision and the 1971 ruling protecting the Pentagon Papers—as foundational to today’s press‑freedom landscape. Although some conservatives have called for revisiting Sullivan, McCraw believes the precedent remains solid.
Looking ahead
McCraw says restoring public belief in the value of a free press will take time. He urges journalists to “evangelize” the importance of independent reporting and to remain humble while speaking out for constitutional rights.
Polls show that while over 70 % of Americans say press freedom is important, trust in news media often falls below 30 %. Bridging that gap, according to McCraw, requires both robust legal defense and a renewed public conversation about why a free press matters for a healthy democracy.
Original reporting: Renton Reporter — read the source article.
