A federal judge has rejected the Pentagon's new attempt to restrict reporting. It's the latest First Amendment victory in the
@nytimes.com lawsuit defending the ability to report freely and fairly. Check out this video to learn more about the lawsuit. www.nytimes.com/video/inside...
The Epstein documents would be as tall as the Empire State Building if you stacked the 3 million pages. My @nytimes.com showed me how they are searching and assessing the documents, including judgment calls they make and new AI tools they use. www.nytimes.com/2026/02/12/i...
I hadn't heard of a war crime called "perfidy" until this new reporting by my @nytimes.com colleagues. www.nytimes.com/2026/01/12/u...
We’d welcome you sharing your feedback in the comments section of the interview. Here's a gift link. nyti.ms/3Z4wRYq
The transcript has been lightly edited for length and to account for instances where Trump spoke off the record. On those occasions the reporters quickly returned the interview back on the record. We noted those places in the interview transcript.
We’ve published the 23,000-word transcript of my @nytimes.com colleagues' interview with President Trump and opened it up for reader comments this morning. We’ve written many news stories off the interview but also think it's important for readers to see the president's words for themselves.
And here is a gift link to Amy's story. Thanks for reading and your feedback. www.nytimes.com/2025/11/17/u...
Here's a gift link to Ernesto's story... nyti.ms/486W2xA
“I think I’ve lost my country,” she recalled thinking as she watched Mr. Trump's inaugural speech where he declared that the U.S. government would now recognize only two genders, male and female. “This is not the America I thought I had represented or that I grew up in.”
The second story, by my colleague Ernesto Londono, is about Robyn McCutcheon, the first American diplomat to come out as transgender. She walked Ernesto through her life story and fascinating career, and why she has decided to leave the United States.
Imara Jones, a transgender journalist who runs the media company TransLash, said to Amy: “What this says is that you, as a transgender person, do not matter to the state, and the state gets to tell you who you are.”
Brianna Wu, a fund-raiser who has had an “F” on her passport but expects to receive an “M” when it expires, told Amy: “A trans woman in sports understands that they’re kind of playing on the edge of something. But this makes me out myself every time I use my passport."
My colleague @amyharmon.bsky.social spoke with trans Americans about the new rule that US passports must reflect the sex on a person’s original birth certificate. They described how and why that rule is a direct blow on their identity and participation in public life.
As the @nytimes.com assistant managing editor for standards and trust, I help edit a lot of pieces. This week I worked on two important stories about the experiences of transgender Americans. They talked to us about how they are coping with policy changes by the Trump administration.
We will keep reporting and update the story with more news and information as we learn and confirm it. Here is the latest version of the story: www.nytimes.com/2025/09/20/u...
Some readers thought we were ignoring the "Free Palestine" claim. We weren't. We were reporting carefully and publishing confirmable facts. The New York Times faces outside pressures to bend its standards sometimes and push one side's agenda. That's not what independent journalists do.
We kept reporting, and soon the attorney general of New Hampshire made a statement, and we updated our story with our reporting and his statement:
Our New York Times standards are clear: we work to confirm information for ourselves, and we try to get confirmation from multiple sources. We are independent journalists, and that means we don't recycle what others write, and we don't have an agenda in our reporting. We seek facts.
No one else confirmed the "Free Palestine" remark; some people told us they only heard other people saying they heard it. Authorities refused to answer questions about it. Meanwhile, other news outlets had the "Free Palestine" detail high up in stories, and some readers asked me why we didn’t.
The "Free Palestine" comment was attributed in several news reports to that same one witness. Our reporters called the witness; he declined to speak, and a woman who answered his phone (and who also witnessed the shooting) said she wasn't sure herself what the gunman said.
After this shooting happened at the New Hampshire country club, we published a breaking news story based on information from authorities and our interviews. Then we started seeing other news outlets report that a witness said the gunman was yelling "Free Palestine." www.foxnews.com/us/witness-s...
Readers ask me how @nytimes.com handles unsubstantiated information and why we don't include certain details in news stories. It has come up with coverage of Charlie Kirk, Gaza & other stories. A good example came up today. It's about this story: www.nytimes.com/2025/09/20/u...
I spoke with @nytimes.com reporters and editors about our stories and judgment calls on Charlie Kirk’s assassination. Here’s the conversation: www.nytimes.com/2025/09/20/u...
Our reporting is intended to help Americans better understand consequential missions undertaken by the U.S. military. You can read the story here:
www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/u...
That problem is that these missions require extreme care and precision but are exceptionally vulnerable to failure. Some are big successes; others go wrong and there is often little public accountability.
The reporters interviewed two dozen current and former U.S. officials familiar with the mission. Why did these officials disclose classified information to us? Several said they did so because the 2019 mission highlights a problem that plagues Special Operations.
The reporters and editors on this story worked on it for months and discussed at length how to handle classified operational details. They factored in the public interest and the sensitivity of some of the information. They decided to withhold some sensitive classified details.
National security reporting like this is in the public interest. These missions often remain shielded by secrecy laws, leaving most Americans with no way to know about major actions that influence national security and may have an impact on their lives.
The Times proceeds cautiously when reporting on classified military operations. As our assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust, I want to walk through why we did this story.