American Commentator Who Worked for Russian TV Challenges Biden-era Charges

The Biden administration called Dimitri Simes, a former Trump adviser, a Russian propagandist. He says the charges against him violate free speech.

An American commentator for Russian television who was indicted during the Biden administration as part of an effort to combat Moscow’s propaganda filed a legal motion on Monday, April 4th, 2026, to dismiss the charges on First Amendment grounds.

Dmitriy Simes, who was an adviser to Donald J. Trump’s first presidential campaign, and his wife, Anastasia Simes, were charged in 2024 with violating U.S. economic sanctions against Russia for their work for a state-owned television network.

In addition to the indictment against Mr. Simes, the Biden administration brought charges against two employees of a Russian broadcaster who were accused of funneling money to right-wing, pro-Trump influencers.

The Biden administration implemented a range of measures to counter foreign efforts to influence American politics and issued warnings about Russian disinformation—including faked videos and other material aimed at undermining faith in U.S. elections or fostering political division.

But the Trump administration has significantly scaled back much of the previous government’s work, which it views as an attempt to infringe on free speech and silence conservative voices.

Despite Mr. Trump’s rollback of his predecessor’s efforts, questions remain about where the line between foreign malign influence and freedom of speech lies.

In a lengthy interview from Moscow, Mr. Simes asserted his innocence. His lawyers say the law the Biden administration used to prosecute him was never meant to curb free expression.

“No one disputes the government’s right to impose economic sanctions on the Russian economy,” said Michel Paradis, a lawyer for Mr. Simes. “But prosecuting an American journalist because he reports for a Russian television channel is just censorship.”

Dmitriy Simes, who immigrated to the United States from the Soviet Union in the 1970s, first came to prominence as an adviser to Richard Nixon. He served as head of the Center for the National Interest from 1994 to 2022, and he hosted Mr. Trump for one of his few major foreign policy addresses during the 2016 election. Although named in the Mueller report investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election, he was ultimately exonerated. [NOTE: For more details on Simes’ life and career, please read below. —JBM].

Now 78 and holding both Russian and American citizenship, Mr. Simes said the Biden administration’s antipathy stemmed from allegations that he had facilitated Russian attempts to contact the Trump campaign. He said he remained deeply critical of American support for Ukraine—but argues he is not a propagandist, noting he invited critics of Russia’s war on his show and asked tough questions of Vladimir V. Putin.

“I continue to feel that a great injustice was done to me,” he said. “I think that this is a very dangerous precedent. The United States has a free press.” —Simes.

Mr. Simes learned of the legal action in 2024 when his wife’s friend, house-sitting in their Virginia home, reported 40 people on the premises and an F.B.I. search underway. Among items seized was a Russian icon his mother—a human rights lawyer—had received from the dissident Andrei Sakharov.

Anastasia Simes was separately accused of helping a Russian businessman evade sanctions by purchasing art and antiques. Their lawyers filed a motion to dismiss her charges on Monday as well. [NOTE: I covered the case brought against the Simes’ family in the article below. —JBM]

Evelyn Douek, an associate professor at Stanford Law School, said she had initially been skeptical of Mr. Simes’s legal claims but found his arguments stronger than expected. The government cannot use economic sanctions against journalistic entities to prevent the spread of propaganda, she said.

“It’s a critical and fundamental principle because one person’s propaganda is another person’s political argument,” she said. “If the government could term anything as propaganda and ban it, that would give it enormous, dangerous power over the public sphere.”

Courts often defer to national security arguments; however, judges may prioritize the $1 million payment that Channel One made to Mr. Simes after it was sanctioned—including a salary deposited into a sanctioned Russian bank—over his free speech claims. One paid Mr. Simes after it was sanctioned, including a salary deposited into a sanctioned Russian bank, rather than for his free speech claims.

The indictment goes further, alleging Mr. Simes received instructions from the Russian government on how to describe the war to minimize Ukrainian successes. His lawyers contend that “singling out American journalists for felony prosecutions” is not reasonably related to the government’s sanctions goals, and note that the underlying law explicitly protects the import and export of “information or informational materials.”

“This moment highlights the importance of First Amendment protections against the government’s efforts to crack down on whatever it wants to call propaganda,” Ms. Douek said. “Because once you empower the government, you don’t get to choose which government gets to wield that power.”

IS IT PROPAGANDA?® —Read. Decide. Question everything.