EXCLUSIVES: Pete Hegseth's Pentagon Hits Back at Stars and Stripes Journalists — and Denies Retaliation in Explosive Free-Speech Battle

Pete Hegseth's Pentagon has fired back in the Stars and Stripes retaliation lawsuit, arguing the journalists’ CBS interviews were not protected speech.
Sept. 2 2026, Published 5:04 p.m. ET
Pete Hegseth's Pentagon is firing back at a group of Stars and Stripes journalists who accused Defense Department officials of retaliation, arguing their controversial comments to CBS News were made as government employees — and were not protected private speech, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal.
According to a new lawsuit obtained by Radar, government attorneys filed a blistering opposition to the journalists' request for a preliminary injunction, urging a federal judge to reject their attempt to block proposed personnel actions against them.
Pentagon Fires Back

Pete Hegseth's Pentagon is pushing back against Stars and Stripes journalists who accused Defense Department officials of retaliation.
The legal showdown involves Stars and Stripes Editor-in-Chief Erik Slavin, reporter Lara Korte and publisher Max Lederer, all of whom remain on paid administrative leave as officials determine whether they will be separated from their positions.
At the center of the dispute are interviews Slavin and Korte gave to CBS for a July 5 segment about the future of the military newspaper.
The journalists claim the Pentagon targeted them in retaliation for speaking out about editorial independence and changes being imposed on the publication.
But government lawyers insist Slavin and Korte were not speaking as private citizens when they appeared on television.
Pentagon Defends Discipline Over Interviews

Stars and Stripes publisher Max Lederer, reporter Lara Korte and Editor-in-Chief Erik Slavin are challenging proposed personnel actions against them.
Instead, attorneys argued the interviews were conducted as part of their professional roles at Stars and Stripes, pointing to the fact both were identified by their job titles and had obtained approval from their immediate supervisors before speaking with CBS.
The Pentagon acknowledged the pair received approval from supervisors at Stars and Stripes, but claimed they failed to obtain authorization from the Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of War for Public Affairs, which the government described as the authority responsible for releasing official Department information to the media.
Government attorneys argued that the distinction is critical, claiming speech made pursuant to an employee's official duties is not insulated from workplace discipline under the First Amendment.
Pentagon Denies Retaliation Over Warship Story

The Pentagon argues the timing of the proposed separations undercuts claims the journalists were targeted over an August Stars and Stripes report.
The Pentagon also pushed back against allegations that the attempted ousters were retaliation for an August 11 Stars and Stripes article involving the USS Abraham Lincoln.
According to the filing, the decision to initiate separation proceedings against Slavin and Korte was communicated internally on July 22, and the notices were finalized by August 6 — five days before the warship story was published.
Attorneys argued that the timeline undercuts the journalists' retaliation theory, noting the disputed article was written by another reporter and claimed nothing connected Korte to the piece.
Judge to Weigh Pentagon Ousters


Lara Korte and Erik Slavin appeared in a CBS Sunday Morning segment that has become central to the Pentagon's defense.
Lederer, meanwhile, is accused of insubordination after refusing repeated directives to deliver proposed separation notices to Slavin and Korte.
He told officials he was "not comfortable with the legal basis and rationale" behind the actions before announcing plans to retire effective September 30.
The employees have asked the court to intervene before any separations occur.
The Pentagon has agreed not to remove any of the three before September 4, when the judge is scheduled to hold a hearing on their request for a preliminary injunction.


