The think tank is standing by its crime-data analysis after President Donald Trump threatened a $5 billion lawsuit unless it withdrew the report.
The Center for American Progress has declined to retract a report that concluded National Guard deployments had “no measurable effect on violent crime trends,” despite a legal threat from President Donald Trump.
According to The Associated Press, Trump attorney Alejandro Brito demanded that the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit withdraw the report by the end of business Friday or face a $5 billion lawsuit. The organization’s refusal leaves the dispute over crime data, presidential credit and the report’s language unresolved.
Headline candidates
- Center for American Progress Rejects Trump’s $5 Billion Retraction Demand — Curiosity 8/10; specificity 10/10; tension 9/10; clarity 10/10; mobile scanability 8/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- Trump Threatens $5 Billion Suit; Think Tank Refuses Retraction — Curiosity 8/10; specificity 10/10; tension 10/10; clarity 9/10; mobile scanability 9/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- Think Tank Rejects Trump Demand to Withdraw Guard-Crime Analysis — Curiosity 7/10; specificity 9/10; tension 8/10; clarity 9/10; mobile scanability 8/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- Trump Seeks Retraction of Report Finding No Measurable Guard Effect — Curiosity 9/10; specificity 9/10; tension 9/10; clarity 8/10; mobile scanability 8/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- CAP Stands by Crime Analysis After Trump’s $5 Billion Legal Threat — Curiosity 8/10; specificity 10/10; tension 9/10; clarity 9/10; mobile scanability 9/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- Trump’s Lawyer Demands Full Retraction Over National Guard Report — Curiosity 7/10; specificity 8/10; tension 8/10; clarity 10/10; mobile scanability 8/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 9/10.
- A Crime-Credit Fight Turns Into a $5 Billion Legal Threat — Curiosity 9/10; specificity 8/10; tension 10/10; clarity 8/10; mobile scanability 9/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- Report Says Guard Had No Measurable Effect; Trump Threatens Suit — Curiosity 9/10; specificity 9/10; tension 10/10; clarity 9/10; mobile scanability 8/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- Neera Tanden Says CAP Will Not Retract Report Targeted by Trump — Curiosity 8/10; specificity 8/10; tension 8/10; clarity 9/10; mobile scanability 8/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- Trump Challenges Think Tank’s Claim on National Guard and Crime — Curiosity 7/10; specificity 8/10; tension 8/10; clarity 10/10; mobile scanability 9/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 9/10.
- CAP Declines Retraction as Trump Weighs $5 Billion Lawsuit — Curiosity 8/10; specificity 10/10; tension 9/10; clarity 9/10; mobile scanability 9/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
- Trump’s $5 Billion Threat Meets a Think Tank’s Refusal — Curiosity 9/10; specificity 8/10; tension 10/10; clarity 9/10; mobile scanability 10/10; source support 10/10; promise delivery 10/10.
CAP says it will not withdraw the analysis
Neera Tanden, the Center for American Progress president and chief executive, said the organization would not retract its work. She called the threatened lawsuit “a transparent attempt to silence us” and said the group would neither cower nor bend.
The nonprofit says its findings are based on its analysis of crime data and are simply “inconvenient to the Trump administration,” Tanden said.
Kevin Metz, the organization’s general counsel, called the defamation allegation “utterly absurd.” He argued that truth cannot be defamation and described the relevant legal standards as protective of speech.
The report focused on timing and cause
The report was published July 13. It criticized the administration for claiming credit for a historic drop in violent crime that the center said was already underway.
Its central conclusion was not that crime had failed to fall. Rather, the analysis said violent crime and murder were declining before the National Guard deployments Trump cited as evidence of policy success.
As AP described the finding, the report concluded that the deployments had “no measurable effect on violent crime trends.” That challenges the claim that the Guard deployments themselves drove the broader decline.
Trump’s attorney objects to the report’s language
The letter was sent Monday and was first reported by The New York Times, according to AP. Brito said the center should “immediately retract the false, malicious, and defamatory statements made about President Trump.”
He highlighted several passages that drew objections, including one saying Trump was seeking to falsely claim that his policies had reduced crime.
Trump’s representatives treat that wording as more than a policy disagreement. The letter says the report caused financial and reputational harm and pairs the retraction demand with the threatened $5 billion claim.
Why the dispute extends beyond one report
The argument centers on whether lower crime figures can be credited to a particular intervention when the decline may have begun before that intervention. Trump’s attorney disputes the report’s characterization of the president’s role; the center stands behind its data analysis.
The threatened litigation adds a separate question about the pressure that legal action, or the prospect of it, can place on organizations publishing critical policy research.
Kevin Goldberg, a First Amendment expert at the Freedom Forum, told AP that threats of this kind can be intended to push an opponent into submission rather than compensate for proven harm. That is Goldberg’s interpretation, not a finding about this specific threatened case.
No lawsuit had been reported as filed
As of AP’s Aug. 21 report, the Center for American Progress had declined to retract its analysis, while Trump was threatening litigation rather than reporting that a case had been filed.
Whether the threat becomes an actual lawsuit remains unclear. For now, the disagreement remains a conflict over the report’s conclusions, the language used to describe Trump’s record and who deserves credit for falling crime.
Leave a Reply