CNN, MSNBC, and Politico journalists were permitted back into the White House on Thursday, just hours after a federal judge ruled that President Donald Trump must lift his ban on the three media organizations. The order came in response to a lawsuit filed by the outlets challenging the September 18 prohibition.
U.S. District Judge Tim Kelly stated that the ban was likely unconstitutional and mandated that his ruling remain in effect for 14 days. In a statement sent to the Associated Press, Theodore Boutrous Jr., the attorney representing the news organizations, called the decision “a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law,” while expressing appreciation for the court’s rapid action.
Although reporters from the affected outlets were initially turned away at the White House gates on Thursday morning, they were granted access later in the day. The Department of Justice had argued on Tuesday that White House access is a privilege rather than an entitlement, maintaining that the president possesses the authority to deny entry to specific news organizations. However, the outlets contended they were targeted due to the content of their reporting, describing the ban as a clear violation of the First Amendment protections for freedom of speech and the press.
During the proceedings, Judge Kelly rejected the government’s argument that national security concerns justified the revocation of the journalists’ credentials. He noted that the record lacked factual support for the claim that removing the passes would protect national security or that reinstating them during the litigation would pose a threat.
Kelly pointed out that President Trump had originally cited only an “alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity” in the outlets’ coverage as the rationale for the ban. Citing two prior rulings from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the judge emphasized that White House press passes can only be revoked after due process has been followed, suggesting the banned outlets had not been given a proper opportunity to contest the decision.
Notably, Kelly, who was nominated by Trump in 2017, previously ordered the restoration of a CNN journalist’s access in a similar case in 2018. The controversy over the ban has prompted other media groups, including DW, to suspend pooled coverage of Trump events in solidarity with the barred outlets.
I’m surprised the national security argument didn’t hold up at all. Seems weak on its face.
So now they are back, but does this actually change how the White House treats critical reporting long-term?
Wait, the judge who reinstated them back in 2018 is the same one? That seems like a pattern.
Finally, a win for the First Amendment. Due process matters even when the president is unpopular.