DOJ Questions Science Journal about Bias, Triggering Free Speech Concerns

The Washington Post

12:14 JST, April 19, 2025

Amid brewing conflict between scientists and the administration of President Donald Trump, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia sent an unusual letter this week to a scientific journal focused on diseases and medicine related to the chest, asking about its editorial policies.

“It has been brought to my attention that more and more journals like CHEST journal are conceding that they are partisans in various scientific debates,” U.S. Attorney Ed Martin wrote.

In the letter, Martin said that he has been told some journals “have a position for which they are advocating due to advertisement (under postal code) or sponsorship (under relevant fraud regulations).”

Martin’s letter states, “The public has certain expectations and you have certain responsibilities.” It then poses questions about the journal’s view of its role in protecting the public from misinformation, its publication of “competing viewpoints” and its handling of allegations that authors have misled readers.

Martin requested that the journal’s editor in chief, Peter Mazzone, respond by May 2.

Chest, an Illinois-based monthly journal published by the American College of Chest Physicians with a global circulation of more than 13,000 and more than 156,000 average monthly visits online, confirmed that it received the letter and was having it reviewed by legal counsel.

“Its content was posted online without our knowledge,” the journal said in a brief statement, declining to comment on the requests made by Martin in the letter.

Free speech experts raised alarm over the letter.

“It’s baffling that the chief federal prosecutor in the District of Columbia could send a letter like this,” said David Snyder, executive director of the nonpartisan, nonprofit First Amendment Coalition. “I cannot imagine what purpose a letter like this would serve other than to chill freedom of expression.”

“The government has no authority under the First Amendment to regulate the editorial decisions of publications, and the letter suggests that’s what Martin intends to do,” Snyder added.

A spokesman for The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services declined to comment, referring questions to the office of the U.S. attorney.

The Justice Department and Martin’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

The letter comes as the scientific community has raised alarm over Trump administration actions that have halted or disrupted research and science. Since Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, funding from the National Institutes of Health has dropped by more than $3 billion compared with grants issued during the same period last year, according to a review of publicly available grant data as of late March.

Universities that power research and innovation across the country fear losing billions in federal funding amid the administration’s actions against elite institutions it views as bastions of “woke” ideology and anti-Israel sentiment. And the White House budget draft for the Department of Health and Human Services calls for massive cuts to federal programs dealing with health and science.

It’s unclear whether similar letters have been sent to other journals. Three other major publishers of medical and scientific journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine and Health Affairs, said they had not received similar letters from Martin. Springer Nature, a large publisher of such journals, said there was no one available to comment when asked whether any of its publications had been contacted by Martin.

“When a U.S. Attorney wields the power of his office to target medical journals over their content, he isn’t doing his job, let alone upholding his constitutional oath,” JT Morris, supervising senior attorney for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said in a statement.

“These letters are just the latest in a pattern of Ed Martin sticking his nose in places where it doesn’t belong, all in an effort to pursue speakers who express views he doesn’t like,” he added.

Martin has sent letters to critics of Elon Musk and the U.S. Supreme Court admonishing them for comments he viewed as threatening or bullying.

Snyder said that he did not see “any legal compulsion that would require [Chest] to respond.”