On June 2, 2025, MSNBC reported that politically appointed officials of the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) lashed out against two VA scientists for authoring a report that, according to the officials, painted the Administration in a bad light. The report, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, voiced that federal cuts to the VA could negatively impact veterans’ respiratory health.
According to internal emails obtained by The Guardian, the senior officials claimed that the scientists had violated VA policy by not getting their article pre-approved before publication. While VA officials argue that they are simply requiring coordination between scientists and public affairs staff, the swift response to the critical article strongly suggests that the Administration is sending a message that could result in the suppression of viewpoints critical of the current VA leadership.
The current Administration is not the first to attempt to stifle government scientists who, on their own time, publish information critical of their employers. Legal precedent from cases dating back to the 1990s, litigated under the administrations of both President George Bush and William Clinton, demonstrate that attempts to “chill” constitutionally protected speech by federal employees can be successfully challenged in federal court.
The 1995 case Sanjour v. EPA is a prime example of a landmark suit that established the First Amendment rights of federal employees to...
Campbell’s, a renowned canned soup brand, recently terminated a high-ranking executive following the emergence of a recording in which he made racially insensitive statements and alleged that the ...