Republican FCC Commissioner Olivia Trusty is pushing back against criticism from progressives and others over recent FCC actions that have sparked First Amendment worries.
In a new paper for The Media Institute's Madison Project—which explores free speech and press roles in American democracy—Trusty defends the agency's approach. “These provisions, and others, are grounded in the statute and decades of precedent,” she writes, pointing to the Supreme Court's long-standing support for using the public interest standard to pursue key goals.
InsideRadio was first to report that Trusty emphasized First Amendment protection remains central to the FCC's work across media and communications. “At the FCC, our regulatory and oversight responsibilities span the media and communications sectors, which means that protecting the First Amendment is paramount to our policy work,” she states.
 |
| Olivia Trusty |
The paper avoids naming specific FCC moves, such as this month's push to limit political candidate appearances on non-news programs. Instead, Trusty uses metaphors to explain the free speech-regulation balance.
She compares core First Amendment protections to standing at “a cliff”—a boundary that is “clear, uncompromising, and absolute.” Broadcasting, by contrast, resembles “walking on a frozen lake.”
“At first as you step on it, the surface feels solid,” Trusty writes. “But, as you continue to move forward, the ice groans underfoot. Cracks spread. You can’t always see how thick the ice is beneath your feet, or whether it will hold if you take that next step.”
While the First Amendment applies to broadcasting, Trusty notes that predictions of the Supreme Court eliminating its special treatment haven't materialized. “Until it does, the Commission has an obligation to apply the law as it stands,” she asserts.