Three local public radio organizations locked in a legal clash with the Trump administration say the President’s order cutting federal funds to NPR has left them fearful of punishment for maintaining ties to the organization, a claim the Department of Justice says is “unripe.”
The legal battle over the executive order titled Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media intensified as both the public radio organizations in question and the federal government filed dueling arguments in US District Court. On NPR’s side, Colorado Public Radio, Aspen Public Radio, and KSUT Public Radio submitted sworn declarations describing what they call an ongoing “chilling effect” on local journalism and public service programming.
KSUT Executive Director Tami Graham described the order’s impact on Indigenous service and local news. Based in Ignacio, CO, KSUT operates as a Tribal radio service funded through the Bureau of Indian Affairs and CPB. Graham said the station recently received a BIA email confirming a $333,897 grant for Fiscal Year 2025, but she fears that ongoing association with NPR may jeopardize future Bureau or CPB funds.
Graham wrote that the order “harms KSUT — including by infringing on our editorial independence, threatening retaliation against KSUT for associating with NPR, purporting to cut off KSUT’s ability to obtain federal funds to license NPR programming or associate with NPR, and threatening KSUT with severe loss in the quality of our programming or our listenership if KSUT ceased airing NPR news and other programming.”
She added that the order effectively forces KSUT to choose between its role as a Tribal public radio station and its membership in the NPR network.
Aspen Public Radio Director of Development Breeze Richardson said the executive order has left her station uncertain about whether it can safely pursue or retain federal funding, even for projects unrelated to NPR programming. Her declaration outlines a direct financial link: the station used CPB funding in 2025 to pay NPR membership fees, including a final payment of $12,658 received in September. Richardson said that the order’s language and enforcement posture signal that future use of any federal funds to support NPR programming could be punished.
Lastly, Colorado Public Radio CEO Stewart Vanderwilt said the order “continues to create uncertainty and, in my view, significant risk with respect to our use of [federal] funds. I fear that CPR will be punished if it uses any of those federal funds to air NPR programming.”
In its formal response, the Department of Justice rejected those claims outright as “moot or unripe challenges.”
The DOJ argued that NPR’s claims rest on speculation rather than evidence of actual or imminent harm. “Each declaration states in a conclusory manner that the Executive Order causes present or imminent harm by seeking to dictate Plaintiffs’ editorial choices,” the brief stated. “But any harm that Plaintiffs suffer is a result of their own actions to surrender control over those editorial choices because the Executive Order provides neither a means by which any federal agency may control Plaintiffs’ programming, nor any imminent threat of harm sufficient to justify a change in Plaintiffs’ programming.”
To rebut claims of retaliation, the DOJ highlighted KSUT’s $333,897 award, which came “nearly five months after the Executive Order issued and nearly four months after that Plaintiff brought this suit.”
“Plaintiffs cannot credibly claim their past association with NPR exposes them to retaliation,” the government wrote, when one plaintiff received significant funding months after both the order and the lawsuit.
The Justice Department also said the order “provides no such mechanism” for enforcement. “It does not contemplate either the CPB or any Executive Branch agency clawing back funds that were already distributed, and Plaintiffs identify no other plausible means by which the Executive Order could be implemented in a manner that could cause these Plaintiffs harm.”
Allegations of potential “tax audits” or “broadcast license revocations,” the DOJ added, are “purely hypothetical.”
Finally, the filing dismissed claims of a chilling effect as legally insufficient: “Plaintiffs’ conclusory allegations of a subjective chill are not an adequate substitute for a claim of a specific present objective harm or a threat of specific future harm.”
Both sides have now framed the dispute as a test of whether the executive order remains enforceable in practice. NPR and its member stations argue it continues to cast a shadow over public broadcasting’s access to federal support. The Justice Department maintains the case is neither active nor grounded in concrete injury.
As the larger debates around perceived government interference and editorial independence remain unresolved, the court heard verbal arguments from both parties on Thursday, with an official order forthcoming.
