Judge Warns First Amendment Faces Risk as Lawsuit by Fired 'Stars and Stripes' Ombudsman Moves Forward Against Pete Hegseth and Pentagon

Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon have failed to kill a lawsuit brought by a fired Stars and Stripes watchdog who accused Defense Department officials of retaliating against her for speaking out about threats to the military newspaper's editorial independence, OK! can reveal.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta refused on October 6 to dismiss former Stars and Stripes Ombudsman Jacqueline Smith's First Amendment retaliation lawsuit, allowing the explosive legal battle to continue.

According to court documents obtained by OK!, Smith served as the newspaper's ombudsman until April, when she was notified that her employment would be terminated just weeks after publishing a column criticizing a new Pentagon policy.

Smith's April 8 column took aim at a Defense Department directive prohibiting Stars and Stripes from publishing comic strips and other syndicated material.

But Smith acknowledged her criticism went further, saying the column was intended to condemn what she viewed as Defense Department efforts to undermine the publication's editorial independence and censor an independent news source.

Less than two weeks later, on April 21, Smith received notice that she was being terminated effective April 28. She sued in June, alleging she was fired in retaliation for constitutionally protected speech.

Smith later sought an injunction that would have reinstated her as ombudsman through the scheduled end of her term in December. Mehta denied that request, finding Smith had not demonstrated at this stage that she was likely to succeed on the merits of her retaliation claim.

The judge concluded the April column appeared to have been written as part of Smith's official duties as ombudsman rather than in her capacity as a private citizen. But the court stopped short of throwing out her lawsuit, and raised a significant question about what the Pentagon's position could mean for journalists employed by the government.

Mehta questioned whether traditional rules governing public employees' speech should strictly apply when an employee's actual job involves First Amendment-protected journalistic work.

The judge offered the example of a Stars and Stripes reporter who writes a story that "meets with disfavor among DoD leadership."

Under a strict application of the government's argument, Mehta reasoned, the journalist could potentially have no First Amendment protection against adverse employment action because reporting was part of the employee’s official responsibilities.

He warned: "It would mean the First Amendment is but a hollow promise for Stars and Stripes journalists, and perhaps its Ombudsman."

The Pentagon had argued it has an interest in the content of Stars and Stripes and in having an ombudsman who works to fulfill the department's directives.

Officials further argued Smith's April column indicated she intended to "undermine the Department's policy and not to support it."

Smith previously publicly linked her firing to her criticism of Pentagon leadership. In an April 23 Stars and Stripes column, she wrote that she had been fired after repeatedly speaking out about what she described as Pentagon attempts to control the newspaper's content.

Hegseth and the Pentagon now face another deadline in Smith's case: the defendants have until October 20 to renew their motion to dismiss or answer the lawsuit.