A federal judge in Washington heard arguments this week over the Trump administration’s decision to bar three news organizations—CNN, Politico, and MS NOW—from White House grounds, but held off on issuing an immediate ruling.
Judge Timothy Kelly considered a request from the outlets for a temporary restraining order that would restore White House credentials to 78 journalists whose passes were confiscated last week after President Trump accused the outlets of spreading “fake news.” The three organizations quickly sued, arguing the move violated the First Amendment, which protects press freedom from government interference.
Lawyers for the news outlets told the court that national security concerns cited by the White House were invented after the fact to punish critical coverage. They pointed out that Trump’s original announcement, posted on his social media platform, made no mention of security risks—those justifications, they said, only surfaced later, including in complaints about reporting on White House construction projects and an internal leak investigation.
A Justice Department lawyer countered that White House access is “a privilege, not a right,” and that the president can restrict entry to protect sensitive information. Attorneys for the media companies dismissed this as a pretext, calling it a clear case of retaliation based on viewpoint.
They urged the judge to act swiftly, citing major breaking news events demanding coverage. Forty-nine other media organizations have filed briefs supporting the lawsuit. The judge said he would rule as soon as possible. For more details, check out the original BBC report.
Source: Federal judge delays ruling on White House media ban (feeds.bbci.co.uk).
Image: historic.brussels, BY 2.0 (via Openverse).