"South Park's" fourth episode of its 27thseason continued its trend of mocking PresidentDonald Trumpand his administration. TheSept. 3 episode, "Wok is Dead," continued a storylineof Trump having a romantic relationship with Satan. This time, though, Satan says the pair have been together "for months, and I want to leave him but I can't because I'm pregnant." The White House has previously said the show "hasn't been relevant for over 20 years," though the season'spremiere set a ratings recordthatcontinued with its second episode. USA TODAY reached out to Paramount and the White House for comment. Satire isprotected by the First Amendment rightto free speech. Experts told USA TODAY that political satire like "South Park's" has some of the greatest constitutional protection, though there are still limits. Here's a look at the First Amendment implications of "South Park's" criticism of Trump. Each episode in the season thus far has referenced the Trump administration. Its premiere episode, titled "Sermon on the 'Mount,"showed Trump in bed with Satan.It also included a scene, whichits YouTube channel noted uses "synthetic media,"showing an AI-generated deepfake of Trump wandering naked in a desert. Trump's genitalia is depicted with googly eyes and a high-pitched voice, elements that the"South Park" creators later said were addedto avoid network censorship. The second episode again linkened Trump to Satan – this time, alsoinvoking Vice President JD Vance. It showed Department of Homeland Security SecretaryKristi Noemshooting dogs – a reference to her 2024 admission in a book that she shot andkilled her "untrainable" family dognamed Cricket. Itsthird episode mocked Trump's deploymentof hundreds of National Guard troops to crack down on crime in Washington, D.C. Along with Satan's pregnancy, the fourth episode referenced the craze over Labubus, aplush toy that's gone viralon social media in recent months, and shows them at one point being used in a ritual that summons Trump and Satan, USA TODAY reported. The First Amendment protects even the most "vigorous, contentious, irreverent, blasphemous" speech, saidNadine Strossen, a professor of law emerita at New York Law School and senior fellow with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). Many of the show's fans appear to agree, asa YouTube comment that saidthe desert scene exemplified "what the First Amendment was made for" received nearly 40,000 thumbs up. "If I had to choose one prime purpose for the First Amendment, which has many very important purposes, this would certainly be it," Strossen said. That's becausepolitical speech is"always placed at the top of the First Amendment hierarchy," she said. TheU.S. Supreme Courthas repeatedly affirmed that notion, including in a 2011 rulingin favor of Westboro Baptist Church memberspicketing military funerals anda 1976 case that banned restrictionson how much money a political campaign could spend and how much of their own money a candidate could contribute to their campaign. In the latter case, the court said "discussion of public issues ... are integral to the operation of the system of government established by our Constitution." Some speech falls outside of the First Amendment, and experts said there's nothing technically stopping Trump from attempting to sue "South Park," though he may face an uphill battle in succeeding. Trump could file a defamation lawsuit – ashe's done many timesin the past – but his status as a public figure means winning such a case would be more difficult than if he were a private citizen. "You're expected to have a thick skin," Strossen said. "This is the price you pay for taking public office." To win in a defamation case, public figures must prove the defendant had actual malice – a legal termdescribing a person who knowingly publishes a false statement or recklessly publishes a statement without concern for whether it's true or not. The Supreme Court affirmed as much in a1988 ruling involving televangelist Jerry Falwell.The case revolved around a fake advertisement in Hustler Magazine's November 1983 issue claiming Falwell had been part of a "drunken incestuous rendezvous with his mother in an outhouse." Falwell sued for invasion of privacy, libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The first two charges were dropped, and the Supreme Court ruling overturned a lower court's ruling that awarded Falwell damages for the third. "The State's interest in protecting public figures from emotional distress is not sufficient to deny First Amendment protection to speech that is patently offensive and is intended to inflict emotional injury when that speech could not reasonably have been interpreted as stating actual facts about the public figure involved," the court said. Though "South Park's" depiction of a naked Trump was a hyperrealistic deepfake, the fact that the show added absurd details – like googly eyes -- to his body makes it even clearer that it's not being presented as a factual statement about Trump, George Washington University Law School ProfessorMary Anne Frankssaid. There's also obscenity, which is not protected by the First Amendment – though it's a historicallynarrow legal categorywithout a clear definition. Courtsconsider whether content is "sexually prurient"without any educational, scientific, artistic or other value in determining whether it counts as obscenity, Franks said. Some could argue that political satire like "South Park" has value that makes it not count as obscenity, though Franks said it's still "possible to cross that line." "We wouldn't necessarily know in advance what the line is, because a lot of that we don't know until the court tells us what it is," Franks said. Ultimately, the First Amendment protects "even really crude and offensive speech," she said. Comedian Kathy Griffin found herself at the center of a U.S. Secret Service investigation thatdid not ultimately result in criminal chargesafter she posed with a fake decapitated head resembling a bloodied Trump in 2017. Griffin hassaid the photo was meant as political satirein response to Trump's comments about Fox News host Megyn Kelly in 2015. Trump said Kelly, whomoderated a Republican primary debatethat August, had "blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her – wherever." Griffininitially apologized for the photoand said she "went way too far," but shelater took back the apologyand said the "whole thing got so blown out of proportion." Following the season premiere,White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers called"South Park" a "fourth-rate show" that "hasn't been relevant for over 20 years and is hanging on by a thread with uninspired ideas in a desperate attempt for attention." Vanceresponded to South Park's portrayalof him by saying, "Well, I've finally made it" inan Aug. 7 X post. Noemsaid she hadn't watched the episodein an interview on "The Glenn Beck Program" podcast but called attacks on her appearance in the season's second episode "lazy." "If they wanted to criticize my job, go ahead and do that, but clearly they can't," she said. "They just pick something petty like that." The next episode of "South Park" is set to air Sept. 17 on Comedy Central. Contributing: Brendan Morrow BrieAnna Frank is a First Amendment reporter at USA TODAY. Reach her atbjfrank@usatoday.com. USA TODAY's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.Funders do not provide editorial input. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:What's the line for 'South Park' in mocking Trump? Experts chime in.
