Elias' Defiant Edge

Marc Elias has spent his career as a prominent Democratic attorney on the front lines of legal battles over voting rights, challenging voter suppression efforts and defending the foundations of the country's election system. Now, he’s taken that expertise and built a media outlet of his own. Democracy Docket, the pro-democracy legal news site he launched in 2020, has quickly expanded into a full-blown newsroom—publishing reporting and analysis for a growing audience.

In a conversation with Status, Elias sounded the alarm on the creeping threats to press freedom under Donald Trump's second term—and called out major media companies for quietly settling lawsuits instead of fighting back. He argued that newsrooms need to stop chasing neutrality and start defending their own independence. And he opened up about what he’s learned operating Democracy Docket as a business.

Below is our Q&A, lightly edited for style.

You’ve spent much of your career defending voting rights—but lately, how concerned are you about the threats to free expression and press freedom under Donald Trump's second term?

I’m very concerned. I have always seen the fight for voting rights and press freedoms as deeply interconnected. Both have foundations in the First Amendment, both are essential to free and fair elections, and both are critical to citizens making informed decisions about their future.

What has concerned me is that too few in the legacy media see the connection. They think that so long as the freedom of the press is protected, everything else is debatable with two sides making equally legitimate arguments. This has made it easier for Trump to divide and conquer. He has been able to demonize the media as the “enemy of the people” and separately engage in election denialism and there are too few voices saying both are wrong, period. This has gotten much worse in the last few months because the corporate ownership of legacy media companies has decided that it might not even be worth fighting for press freedom if it jeopardizes their bottom lines.

Do you think the fact that major media and tech companies have moved to settle lawsuits filed by Trump has weakened their position—legally, reputationally, or both?

Both, and perhaps as importantly, they’ve weakened their position as businesses. By settling baseless lawsuits, these companies have caused a complete breach of trust with their audiences and consumers.

One of the reasons we are seeing a decline in legacy media ratings and subscribers is that people have lost confidence that the media is willing to tell them the unvarnished truth if it might offend Trump. Why would anyone believe a news outlet that shells out millions of dollars to appease the person they are covering? I think that is why Democracy Docket has seen such strong growth in recent months—our audience can clearly see our independence and pro-democracy perspective in every piece of content we publish.

We have heard a lot about the lack of solidarity among the Big Law firms—and that is true. I have been an outspoken critic of the legal industry. But the media has shown less courage to shame those entities cutting these odious deals with Trump. Readers and viewers will ultimately reward outlets that exercise integrity. You cannot cut a check to Trump for tens of millions of dollars and then expect your audience to believe you are independent.

What should journalists and publishers actually be doing now to protect themselves, legally and structurally, from what may come?