درباره این اپیزود
When television networks stood together against CNN’s exclusion from the White House, the Justice Department responded with an antitrust investigation. Is this legitimate enforcement—or a warning about the cost of challenging presidential power?
In this episode of Justice ReDesigned, retired Judge Steven Teske examines the law behind the investigation and the circumstances that raise questions about its purpose. Antitrust law can prohibit competitors from coordinating a refusal to provide services. But does a temporary suspension of shared television coverage to defend press access constitute an unlawful restraint of competition?
The episode explores the networks’ protest, Judge Timothy Kelly’s preliminary ruling against the White House press ban, and former DOJ official Ed Martin’s remarks about publicly shaming people the department cannot charge.
The question of retaliation remains open. So does a broader concern: an investigation can impose costs and discourage dissent even without producing an indictment. What evidence justifies this inquiry—and what should the public expect from a Justice Department entrusted to enforce the law fairly?
Get full access to Justice ReDesigned at steventeske.substack.com/subscribe
