Key facts
- The Trump administration is defending its decision to ban CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House grounds.
- The administration argued in a court filing that the president has broad authority to determine journalist access.
- The administration cited national security concerns related to the outlets' reporting.
- The news organizations are scheduled to make their case to a US district judge on Wednesday afternoon.
- The lawsuit argues the ban violates the outlets' First Amendment rights.
- The administration is asking the court to overturn a 1977 appeals court ruling, Sherrill vs Knight.
The Trump administration is defending its decision to ban CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House grounds, arguing in a court filing that the president has broad authority to determine which journalists can access the complex and that the outlets’ reporting raised national security concerns.
A US district judge heard arguments on Wednesday afternoon regarding a request by the news outlets for a temporary restraining order that would immediately reinstate their White House access while a legal challenge they filed plays out. It remains unclear when the judge will issue a decision.
In a filing ahead of the hearing, Justice Department lawyers stated that the outlets failed to meet the administration's described standards of professionalism and decorum, asserting that "Access to the White House is a privilege — not a right."
The White House press office sent letters to the three outlets on Tuesday, alleging their coverage involved "trafficking in verifiable falsehoods about national security and other issues, and publishing sensitive or classified information." Specific examples cited included CNN publishing "top-secret" construction details of a bunker, MS NOW coverage of the impact of the Iran war on US military munitions, and Politico reports on funding for the White House ballroom and a Republican congressional midterm convention.
The administration is also asking the court to overturn a 1977 appeals court ruling, Sherrill vs Knight, which held that White House press access could not be denied arbitrarily or without compelling reasons. The lawsuit by the three outlets argues that the ban violates their First Amendment rights.
Katie Fallow, deputy litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, described the proceedings as historic, noting that no president had previously taken such an explicit step to ban entire news outlets based on their reporting.
The case was assigned to District Judge Timothy Kelly, who previously ordered the restoration of CNN reporter Jim Acosta’s White House credentials during Trump’s first term. President Trump expressed disappointment in the selection on Truth Social, stating the judge was appointed by him and had previously ruled in favor of Acosta.