Trump Administration Allegedly Pressures Amazon to Remove Books Critical of Trump, Raising First Amendment Concerns

Credit: davidpakman.com

Independent journalist David Pakman recently alleged that the Trump administration is pressuring Amazon to remove books critical of former President Donald Trump from its marketplace, a move experts warn could violate First Amendment protections and establish a troubling precedent for political censorship in the United States.

In a detailed and urgent video posted on his YouTube channel, Pakman shared the contents of an anonymous Reddit post that appeared in a forum frequented by Amazon Web Services (AWS) employees. The post, which was titled “Trump Admin trying to remove books from online marketplace,” claimed that a major government client has threatened to cancel its contract with AWS unless Amazon removes certain books that portray Trump in a negative light.

“This is censorship,” Pakman said. “It would be the government imposing limitations on the speech of others in exchange for government contracts. This should never happen in a country that values free expression.”

The anonymous Reddit user stated, “Today my boss got this email that one of our largest government clients is going to cancel their contract if we do not remove these books that are critical of Trump. This is nuts. We have nothing to do with the book side of the business. And even if we did, this is censorship.”

The post included a redacted screenshot of an internal communication with the subject line “Book removal request.” The message referenced a discussion between the client and AWS, noting that the client would not move forward with renewing their contract unless certain books were removed from Amazon’s retail listings. One of the books mentioned in the request was Pakman’s own, “The Echo Chamber: How Right-Wing Extremism Created a Post-Truth America.”

Other authors allegedly targeted by the request include progressive commentator Brian Tyler Cohen, historian Heather Cox Richardson, journalist Brian Stelter, and psychologist Mary L. Trump, whose bestselling book “Too Much and Never Enough” detailed her personal and professional perspective on the former president’s upbringing and leadership style.

Pakman noted that although the Reddit post remains anonymous, the user had a long history of credible, technically informed contributions to AWS-related discussions, giving weight to the possibility that they are indeed a current employee.

Pakman said he and his team reached out to contacts within Amazon for verification. Most employees declined to comment, describing the matter as “radioactive.” However, one individual reportedly stated that the request had been “brought up the flagpole,” meaning that it had been escalated to Amazon’s legal department and senior leadership for further review.

Legal scholars say that the First Amendment prohibits the government from interfering with or restricting freedom of speech and expression. However, when the government attempts to coerce private companies into removing content by leveraging financial contracts, the situation enters a gray area that courts have historically found to be unconstitutional.

“Government actors may not condition public contracts on the suppression of protected speech,” explained a constitutional law expert familiar with the topic. “If the government’s influence leads a private platform to censor material, even indirectly, courts are likely to see that as a First Amendment violation.”

Pakman emphasized the broader implications of such interference. “This is not just about one book or one author. It is about whether our government can weaponize its financial and regulatory power to silence dissenting voices. If they can pressure Amazon to do this quietly, what is to stop them from doing it to every publisher, platform, or media outlet in America?”

The commentator also compared the situation to historical and contemporary examples of authoritarian censorship. During Adolf Hitler’s rule in Nazi Germany, the government banned and burned books deemed politically subversive or culturally unacceptable. In the Soviet Union, the Communist Party maintained tight control over media and publishing, suppressing works that diverged from the state’s ideological line. More recently, in China, the government routinely compels tech companies and publishers to remove content that criticizes the ruling Communist Party, using licensing threats and regulatory leverage.

“These regimes feared criticism because criticism threatens power,” Pakman said. “The tools may be more sophisticated today, but the strategy is the same: silence opposing voices before they can shape public opinion.”

He continued, “Brian Tyler Cohen’s book is on the list. Heather Cox Richardson’s book is on the list. Mary Trump’s book is on the list. These are not fringe authors. These are respected voices who have raised valid concerns about the direction of our country. If their work can be erased by government pressure, no one is safe.”

In response to the alleged threat, Pakman said he has begun speaking with legal counsel and his publisher about potential next steps, including litigation. He urged supporters to purchase the book, particularly on Amazon, as a way of signaling to the company and the public that censorship attempts will be met with resistance.

“It might be counterintuitive,” he said, “but buying the book on Amazon is one of the strongest statements you can make right now. It shows demand. It shows that people are paying attention. And it makes it harder for them to justify pulling it down quietly.”

Pakman also advised viewers to sign up for his Substack newsletter and subscribe to his YouTube channel and audio podcast. He noted that if platforms were pressured to remove his content, Substack would be the only platform where he retained access to his audience.

As of press time, Amazon has not issued a public statement. The identity of the government client or agency allegedly behind the book removal request has not been revealed.

Pakman closed his video with a warning: “This is uncharted territory. This is an unprecedented attempt to silence the independent press. And it is happening right now in the United States. If we do not raise our voices, we may lose the very freedoms we take for granted.”

The Carrasco Chronicle will continue to report on this story as new developments emerge.