News Outlets Argue White House Can't Pull Passes Over Negative Stories
The outlets say a ban over negative stories violates speech and due process rights, and a judge must now decide.
Up First from NPR · Hurricane Isaias Prep, Competitive Midterm Races, Trump's Media Ban In CourtIn mid-September, President Donald Trump banned reporters from CNN, MSDNow, and Politico from the White House. His explanation was blunt. There was something wrong, he said, with allowing "people to write purposely negative stories," adding, "I don't have to let them into my, into the People's House."
The outlets argue that reason is not enough, and a federal judge has not yet decided whether they are right.
As media correspondent David Folkenflik notes, the White House does not have to credential everyone. Space is limited, and security matters. But the three news organizations argue that once the White House opens the gates, the First Amendment, the part of the Constitution that protects free speech and a free press, bars pulling passes because officials dislike what was published. Folkenflik, who covers the lawsuit, says that principle appears to be settled law, including from cases during Trump's first term.
They also invoke the Fifth Amendment, the part that guarantees fair legal process. They say the president gave no warning ahead of time and provided no process to appeal, which the law calls due process.
The White House answers that the president's authority over his workplace outweighs a court order. It points to what it calls national security concerns, including reporting about the underground space beneath its new East Wing ballroom project, which the White House describes as a national security matter, and reporting by MSDNow about a leak investigation that embarrassed FBI Director Kash Patel. It also points to an earlier preliminary ruling involving the Associated Press that allowed limits on access to tighter quarters such as the president's office and plane.
A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order, an emergency freeze, blocking the ban while he studied the issues, but access has been uneven since. CNN, part of a five-network pool that shares the cost and work of filming the president for other outlets, has at times been let into the pool and at times kept out, and more recently has been kept out of Air Force One. The order is now expiring, and the judge must decide whether to issue a preliminary injunction that would extend protection through trial or set the case for trial.
Questions people ask
What is the White House press pool?
It is a small rotating group of reporters and camera crews that follows the president in tight spaces and shares notes, photos, and video with the wider press corps. For television, five major networks share the work and cost of filming the president for other outlets. That is why being kept out of the pool matters even if a reporter can still enter the building.
What is the difference between a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction?
A temporary restraining order is an emergency freeze issued quickly to preserve the status quo for days or weeks while a judge studies the issues. A preliminary injunction follows more argument and evidence and can keep protections in place through trial. In this case, the judge used the first device and must now decide whether to grant the second.