Senior legal columnist Harry Litman has resigned from the Los Angeles Times, alleging that the paper's owner, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, has compromised editorial integrity by appeasing President-elect Donald Trump.

Harry Litman cited a significant shift in the newspaper’s editorial policy -- and a perceived deference to Trump -- as his reason for resigning, sparking a series of similar departures among staff, as Fox News reports.

Litman, known for his sharp legal analyses, announced his departure from one of the nation's leading newspapers on MSNBC, in a detailed discussion with anchor Nicolle Wallace.

He expressed his disapproval of the newspaper's recent editorial changes, including its surprising decision to refrain from endorsing a presidential candidate for the first time since 2008.

Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, who acquired the Times in 2018, has been steering the publication towards what he describes as a non-partisan approach. This includes the appointment of conservative commentator Scott Jennings to the editorial board, reflecting a broader shift in the paper’s editorial outlook.

The resignation of Litman was soon followed by three other editorial board members, signaling a broader dissatisfaction with the new direction.

New Editorial Board Reflects Non-Partisan Vision

The inclusion of Jennings, a strong conservative voice, marks a significant turn in the board's composition. Jennings himself has praised Soon-Shiong's initiative, stating it as "important and groundbreaking" in a move towards non-partisanship in journalism.

Soon-Shiong also plans to innovate with technology to ensure editorial transparency. He has proposed the introduction of an AI-powered "bias meter" to help readers assess the level of bias in opinion pieces, a feature he hopes to launch by January.

However, these changes have not been without controversy. The Los Angeles Times did not respond immediately to a request for comment from Fox News Digital regarding the internal uproar caused by these decisions.

Litman Speaks Out on Editorial Integrity

In his discussion with Wallace, Litman emphasized the critical role newspapers play in the democratic process, especially in a political climate increasingly dominated by figures like Trump. He expressed concern that the newspaper was failing to uphold its duty to challenge misinformation.

"Papers have such an important role to play now and in this country. Trump has captured the political arena, maybe the Supreme Court, and he’s going after now the FBI, potentially the military, and, really, they’re one of the few institutions to be able to stand up and push back," Litman argued.

According to Litman, the decision to avoid endorsing a candidate and the inclusion of more conservative voices like Jennings are indicative of an alarming trend of media outlets shying away from their responsibility to confront powerful figures.

Concerns Over Media's Role in Democracy

Litman's resignation highlights a broader debate about the role of media in politics and whether newspapers like the Los Angeles Times should maintain a stance of neutrality or actively combat misinformation and bias.

"And it’s in their finest tradition, and Trump has made clear he’ll go after them. And that’s an, you know, absolute five-alarm fire," added Litman on the urgency of the situation.

His comments underline the tension between journalistic neutrality and the need to provide vigorous scrutiny of political figures who wield considerable influence over public opinion and policy.

Future of L.A. Times in Question

The series of resignations and the public fallout raise questions about the future direction of the Los Angeles Times. As the paper attempts to balance its editorial voice amidst a highly polarized political landscape, it faces both internal and external challenges to its credibility and mission.

Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong's initiatives, including the upcoming bias meter, are seen as part of a broader attempt to redefine the newspaper's role in an evolving media environment. However, the effectiveness of these changes in restoring trust and maintaining readership remains to be seen.

As the Los Angeles Times navigates these troubled waters, the impact of these editorial decisions will likely resonate not just within its own corridors but across the wider media landscape, influencing how newspapers nationwide approach the delicate balance between impartiality and advocacy.