Judge blocks Trump’s White House ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico

NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge temporarily blocked US President Donald Trump’s move to ban three news outlets from the White House grounds, ordering early Thursday that CNN, MS NOW and Politico must have their access restored.

It’s the latest development in an escalating showdown between Trump and media outlets whose coverage he dislikes. Trump announced he was banning the outlets Friday, assailing what he called “fake news,” and later arguing that their reporting was a risk to national security. The outlets argued the ban was a blatant First Amendment violation because it singled them out for the content of their coverage.

In an order, US District Judge Timothy Kelly said the media outlets had met the legal thresholds to obtain a temporary restraining order, in effect for 14 days. He said they were likely to succeed in showing that their White House press passes were revoked without due process.

0:00 / 0:00

Promoted: Bridges for Peace

“This is a high bar, but Plaintiffs have met it,” he wrote.

The ruling hands the news outlets a reprieve in the escalating showdown between Trump and news organizations whose coverage he sees as negative. But the administration has repeatedly found ways to challenge coverage it dislikes.

Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email and never miss our top stories

By signing up, you agree to the terms

Kelly said the government must have clear standards for conduct that would lead to revoking a press pass. He called the standard of objectionable reporting outlined in letters that the White House sent the outlets “so vague it hardly does the trick.”

Kelly — whom Trump nominated in 2017 and who ordered a CNN journalist’s access restored in a similar case in 2018 — heard arguments Wednesday. Temporary restraining orders are typically designed to preserve the status quo pending a closer review of the case by the court.

“This is a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law,” Theodore Boutrous Jr., attorney for the outlets, said in an emailed statement. “We greatly appreciate the court’s swift action.”

The White House did not immediately respond to an email from The Associated Press requesting comment.

In an emergency hearing Wednesday, Kelly said his decision must be guided by prior rulings in comparable First Amendment cases, even if the government disagrees with them. His decision noted that the White House argued that previous cases cited had been wrongly decided.

“Maybe,” Kelly wrote, “but this Court is bound by DC Circuit precedent, full stop.”

Kelly also rejected the White House’s claim that revoking the press passes was necessary for national security, saying officials did little to back up that notion.

“Nothing in the record… suggests that the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes was motivated by national security concerns,” he wrote. “The Court is skeptical… that Defendants’ interest in safeguarding national security is the actual motivation for, or is even advanced by, the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes.”

Attorneys debated access to White House and any risk to national security

Boutrous argued about the urgent need for a change, saying there had been irreparable harm to the outlets at a time of momentous news events.

“We’re at war. We have world leaders coming to Washington.”

Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik had reiterated the administration’s point that the president had the right to choose who gets into the White House.

“Access to the White House is a privilege, not a right,” Velchik said.

In arguing that Trump was not engaging in viewpoint discrimination, Velchik said the president had criticized other news organizations even more harshly — such as calling ABC “the worst” — but hadn’t banned them.

“The president should be able to take immediate action to protect national security,” Velchik told the court.

In response, Boutrous said, “Suddenly it’s a national security case,” arguing that the president brought up that point only after the lawsuit was filed.
Trump “keeps proving our point,” Boutrous said, describing how the president has consistently used negative coverage of him as justification for the ban.

Trump administration outlined ‘reporting incidents’ of each outlet

In a filing Tuesday, administration lawyers detailed letters sent to each of the three news outlets that identified “a non-exhaustive list of reporting incidents, including those that have threatened national security and spread falsehoods.”

The “reporting incidents” cited included: CNN reporting on “‘top-secret’ construction details related to the East Wing bunker;” MS NOW reporting “on an alleged leak investigation;” and Politico publishing “a document detailing funding for the White House ballroom containing intricate descriptions of how the Secret Service would invest in security improvements.”

Further examples were given in individual letters. Politico’s letter detailed six reporting instances, including in June, citing a “senior administration official … granted anonymity” predicting whether a preliminary deal would end the conflict with Iran.

That item appeared to reference a background briefing set up by the White House, where an official briefed reporters on condition of anonymity under ground rules set by the White House itself. Several other outlets also reported the official’s remarks.

Major networks refrained from covering Trump for the media pool

The ban prompted other media outlets to take action in solidarity. The five-network US network press pool — a rotating cast of news outlets that covers the president, and to which CNN belongs — suspended coverage of Trump events.

After the hearing Wednesday, the networks continued their ban on filming Trump coverage. At Joint Base Andrews, where the president formally welcomed Chinese President Xi Jinping, journalists from Fox News, CBS and NBC were present but not shooting video.

Other television outlets whose crews were present, according to signs on their tripods and cameras, were NewsNation, Newsmax, Right Side Broadcasting Network, One America News and LindellTV.

Ahead of Wednesday’s hearing, an amicus brief was filed by other news groups, including The AP, urging the court to immediately restore the three outlets’ White House access.

Help us report truthfully on social media

As a multimedia journalist, my job is to take the quality, fact-based journalism produced by The Times of Israel newsroom and make it accessible across every platform — from Instagram posts to podcasts to short-form videos.

This is how many, especially young people, consume news these days. But misinformation is rampant on social media. Our team at ToI produces accurate, responsible short-form reporting on Israel and the Jewish world. 

If you believe in the importance of factual social media journalism, please consider joining our reader support group, The Times of Israel Community. Your financial support is essential to sustain responsible multimedia reporting.

— Gabriella Jacobs, multimedia journalist

Support our work Support our work Already a member? Sign in to stop seeing this