CNN’s Word Police Come for Scott Jennings

If you ever needed proof that CNN’s internal culture has drifted so far left it is practically orbiting Pluto, look no further than the latest meltdown over conservative contributor Scott Jennings. The man committed the unpardonable sin — not of lying, not of defamation, not of incitement — but of uttering two words that send CNN staffers collapsing on the fainting couch — “illegal aliens.”

Yes, that’s right. Jennings used the term that appears in federal law, in federal statutes, in federal court rulings, and in the official language of the U.S. government. And for this, CNN staffers are reportedly “up in arms.” One can only imagine CNN producers hurling their lattes into the air, interns scrambling for emotional‑support therapy dogs, and executives drafting yet another memo about “inclusive language” while ignoring the actual news.

The network has a policy — a policy — against using the official term “illegal alien.” Because nothing says journalistic integrity like banning the terminology used by the very government agencies that you are reporting on.

Jennings, to his credit, refused to bow to the linguistic censors. During an on‑air exchange with Parkland survivor Cameron Kasky, Jennings said ICE agents should be able to “chase down illegals” in Minnesota. Kasky, apparently deputized as CNN’s junior language enforcer, scolded him. Jennings responded with the kind of plainspoken clarity that sends media hall monitors into cardiac arrest. He said, “Who are you to tell me what I can and can’t say? … They’re illegal aliens. And that’s what the law calls them. Illegal aliens. That’s what I’m going to call them”

Cue the outrage. Cue the internal Slack channels lighting up like a Christmas tree. Cue the staffers demanding that Jennings be re‑educated, reprimanded, or perhaps marched through the newsroom wearing a sandwich board reading “I said a naughty word.”

Let us pause here. Because this is where the hypocrisy becomes Olympic‑level.

CNN had no problem — none — when its own hosts, contributors, and guests compared ICE agents to Nazis, Gestapo, and stormtroopers. Those untrue slurs have been tossed around like bricks at a left-wing protest. No internal memos. No staff revolts. No anguished op‑eds about “harmful rhetoric.”

But … use the term that appears in the U.S. Code, and it suddenly becomes a five‑alarm hair fire. That is not journalism. That is politics dressed up as woke sensitivity and political correctness.

The left prefers the euphemism “undocumented immigrant” — a phrase carefully engineered to remove any implication of illegality. It is the linguistic equivalent of calling a bank robber an “unauthorized withdrawal specialist.” The goal is not accuracy — it is emotional framing. If you can soften the official and accurate language, you can soften the public’s perception of the underlying issue.

But Jennings committed the cardinal sin of refusing to play along. He used the original, official, legally accurate term. And for that, CNN staffers want him censored. Let’s be clear: This is not about kindness. This is not about inclusion. This is not even about good journalism. This is about controlling a partisan narrative. When a news organization bans a legally accurate term because it conflicts with the preferred political framing of its staff, that organization is no longer practicing journalism. It’s practicing activism.

And the irony — the delicious, dripping irony — is that Jennings’ First Amendment rights are precisely what allow CNN staffers to complain about him in the first place. Free speech for me, but not for thee. That’s the modern media ethos. Jennings did not insult anyone. He did not target a protected class. He did not advocate violence. He used the terminology of federal law. If CNN’s internal culture cannot tolerate that, the problem is not Jennings. The problem is CNN.

The network’s staffers have every right to disagree with him. They have every right to argue their preferred terminology. But they do not have a concomitant right to muzzle Jennings because he refuses to adopt their politically crafted vocabulary.

And let us not pretend this is an isolated incident. CNN’s internal ideological tilt has been obvious for years. The Jennings pile‑on is just the latest example of a newsroom where dissenting viewpoints are treated like biohazards requiring immediate containment.

If CNN wants to regain credibility, it might start by allowing its contributors to use the language of the law without fear of internal reprisal. It might also consider applying its outrage consistently — perhaps reserving some of that righteous fury for the people who compared federal law‑enforcement officers to Nazis. But consistency is hard when your guiding principle is not truth, but politics.

Scott Jennings stood his ground. Good for him. The First Amendment protects his right to speak plainly and truthfully— even if CNN’s staffers would prefer he speak in euphemisms approved by the left-wing Ministry of Approved Terminology.

And if that makes them uncomfortable? Well, maybe journalism is not the right line of work for people who get apoplectic over proper terminology.

So, there ‘tis.