CNN, Politico, and MS NOW asked a federal judge in Washington to restore White House press passes for 78 reporters after President Donald Trump barred the three outlets last week. Judge Timothy Kelly heard the request for a temporary restraining order and issued a temporary restraining order against the ban, according to the BBC.
The outlets said their credentials were taken and their reporters were kept off the grounds because Trump disliked their coverage. They jointly sued and called the ban unconstitutional. Trump accused the organizations of spreading “fake news.”
In court, a Justice Department lawyer said the president has the right to “exclude anyone he wants” from certain locations inside the White House. Counsel for the news organizations said the administration is falsely using national security to defend the decision.
Boutrous tells the court the security rationale came after the ban
Theodore Boutrous, who represents the three outlets, argued that the White House built a national security claim in order to punish reporting it viewed as critical. “They’re literally arguing that reporters shouldn’t scrutinize national security issues and decisions by the government,” the BBC quoted him.
Boutrous told the judge that Trump did not mention national security in the Truth Social post last Friday that ordered the ban. The DOJ’s national security rationale was not part of Trump’s original Truth Social post, as he later defended the ban by claiming a right to clean out fake news.
He said that explanation was added later. Michael Velchik, arguing for the Department of Justice, said “access to the White House is a privilege, not a right.” Velchik claimed the outlets had published material that could harm national security. Boutrous disputed that claim.
“The viewpoint discrimination is probably the clearest case in history. I mean, the president said, ‘I don’t like what you’re publishing. I’m taking away your press pass based on that,'” Boutrous said at the hearing. “They are using national security as this talisman – these magic words,” he said. “It is just a pretextual, post hoc effort to justify just a blatant violation of due process.”
He asked for a fast decision, pointing to coverage of the Iran war, the U.N. General Assembly in New York City, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s U.S. visit, and debate over AI regulation.
Before the hearing, the Justice Department filed a list of “reporting incidents” it said supported the ban. Those filings cited stories about White House construction, including a security bunker and a new ballroom, as well as a report on an internal leak investigation.
The outlets said the ban violates the First Amendment, which bars the government from “abridging” freedom of the press. In a joint statement, they said: “Without notice or process, the White House revoked our journalists’ credentials because it objected to our reporting. Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism free from government interference.”
Forty-nine news organizations, among them CBS News, The New York Times, and Fox News, filed a brief backing the suit. The White House’s new stream, such as when it launched Trump TV after banning CNN, Politico, and MS NOW, became a central point of the controversy. Major television networks left the White House pool, the shared feed of video and stills of the president, in protest. The White House then started Trump TV, a 24/7 stream of clips of the president.
