A federal judge has temporarily lifted Donald Trump’s ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House press access, ruling the restrictions likely unconstitutional. US District Judge Timothy Kelly issued an order on Thursday returning the outlets’ press passes and blocking enforcement of the ban for 14 days, after the news organizations filed a lawsuit contesting the move announced September 18. The judge rejected the Trump administration’s claim that national security concerns justified the ban, finding “the record lacks factual support” for that assertion. Trump had publicly stated the ban stemmed from the outlets’ “alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity.”
Lawyers for CNN, MS NOW, and Politico argued the White House violated the First Amendment and due process rights of the journalists. They contended the ban was retaliatory for critical coverage, and took place “without a semblance of due process.” The Justice Department defended the ban, citing articles the outlets published, including reporting on White House construction and discussions with Iran. However, Judge Kelly found that in most cases, the stories cited were written by journalists who did not even have White House press passes, and the administration failed to demonstrate a link between the passes and the reporting. The judge also noted that the administration initially justified the ban based on negative reporting, only later citing national security concerns.
Multiple media organizations filed legal briefs supporting the lawsuit, including CBS News, The New York Times, and Fox News. Major TV networks also temporarily withdrew from White House pool duties in protest. The ruling comes weeks before the November 3 midterm elections, where Trump’s fellow Republicans are fighting to retain control of Congress.
Our reading is that this ruling represents a temporary setback for the Trump administration’s attempts to control the narrative surrounding its actions. The judge’s rejection of the administration’s stated justifications for the ban, coupled with the finding of a lack of factual support, suggests a degree of skepticism toward the administration’s motivations. The support shown to the affected news organizations by other media outlets indicates a broader concern about the potential for retaliatory restrictions on press access.
Read the original coverage
💬 Comments
📜 Comment Policy