Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration Ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico White House Access
Federal judge blocks Trump administration ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, ruling the White House press credential revocation likely violates the First Amen...
POLICY WIRE — Washington, United States — A federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from enforcing a ban that barred reporters from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from entering the White House grounds.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, an appointee of President Trump, delivered a 26-page ruling on Tuesday that preserves press access for the three news organizations indefinitely while ongoing litigation proceeds.
Judge Kelly concluded that the revocation of hard press credentials for the media outlets likely infringed upon their First and Fifth Amendment protections.
It is likely that President Trump’s revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes is the sort of action that would deter a reasonable reporter or news organization from publishing stories to which he objects, Kelly wrote in his opinion, adding that the removal significantly impacts how and whether journalists can perform their duties.
Prior to the ruling, President Trump acknowledged that his administration anticipated losing the legal battle, stating on Truth Social last month that the Justice Department would appeal an adverse decision.
The president originally announced the exclusion of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico journalists due to what he termed constant reporting of fake news, prompting U.S. Secret Service agents to turn away reporters and confiscate credentials when they arrived at the White House.
The news organizations initiated their lawsuit on September 21, asserting that the administration retaliated against them for their critical news coverage and failed to provide due process under the Fifth Amendment by withholding prior notice and an opportunity to respond.
Following the legal filing, the White House Press Office issued letters on September 22 citing national security concerns and professional standards violations, establishing a September 25 deadline for a response alongside a list of flagged articles.
Court records revealed that the administration targeted several stories written by individuals without hard passes, including a Politico piece from June that originated from a White House press call where officials instructed participants to attribute quotes to a senior administration official.
Kelly previously granted temporary relief late last month focusing on due process arguments, though he has now expanded protection to address broader First Amendment claims as requested by the plaintiffs.
During a court hearing last week, the judge questioned Justice Department attorneys regarding inconsistencies between official legal justifications centered on national security and President Trump’s explicit public statements about negative coverage.
Kelly pointed out that the president repeatedly asserted publicly that actions were taken because of specific grievances, contrasting with the government’s courtroom arguments.
The court determined that the administration failed to substantiate claims that the initial pass revocations stemmed from genuine national security threats, noting that neither the September 18 social media announcement nor subsequent statements mentioned national security until days later.
This conflict marks a continuation of historic tensions between the president and media organizations, recalling a previous dispute where the Associated Press was barred from certain events over naming conventions regarding the Gulf of Mexico, a matter still pending review in federal appeals court.
Reporting by Policy-Wire (PW)
