On paper, the Justice Department has defended the administration’s decision by saying that the three networks have repeatedly failed to meet basic standards of “professionalism and decorum” and have, at other times, published “sensitive or classified information.”
Three major news outlets have filed a First Amendment lawsuit over President Donald Trump’s decision to revoke their White House press credentials.
The plaintiffs—CNN, Politico, and MS Now—have since filed an emergency request in a D.C.-based district court. The case could lead to hearings and legal arguments being heard later this week.
“This ban could not be a more direct assault on the First Amendment nor a more blatant violation of our most fundamental constitutional principles,” says the lawsuit, which asks the court to immediately reinstate their journalists’ access to the White House.
In a statement, the news networks accused the Trump administration of violating their First Amendment rights and due process protections.
“This morning, we notified the government that we are filing a lawsuit today to protect our First Amendment rights and defend the principle that the government does not decide what the press reports or publishes,” the companies said in a jointly-issued statement.
“Without notice or process, the White House revoked our journalists’ credentials because it objected to our reporting,” they said. “Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism free from government interference.”
CNN notes that, as recently as last Friday—when he announced the ban—Trump indicated that he may add other networks to the list.
“The White House is not instituting an assault on the Free Press, something which I cherish. It is instituting an assault on the FAKE NEWS, something that has grown like Cancer in our beloved United States of America,” Trump wrote in a statement POSTED TO Truth Social on Monday. “It is corrupt, purposeful, pervasive, fully coordinated, and totally out of control. It is a threat to our National Security, and must be stopped, NOW!”
The lawsuit centers on the president’s vague reasons for revoking press access, including his disdain for “negative stories.”
“If they want to write them, that’s fine,” Trump said. “I don’t have to let them into the people’s house.”
On paper, the Justice Department has defended the administration’s decision by saying that the three networks have repeatedly failed to meet basic standards of “professionalism and decorum” and have, at other times, published “sensitive or classified information.”
“After all, access to the White House is a privilege—not a right,” Justice Department senior counsel Michael Velchik wrote.
The Trump administration has pointed to older court rulings that allowed the White House to briefly bar The Associated Press from accessing certain spaces over its refusal to use terminologies like “Gulf of America” instead of the longstanding “Gulf of Mexico.”
The Department of Justice maintains that this same logic should be applied throughout the White House and nearby executive complexes; that the president, in short, should be able to “consider journalists’ viewpoints” when deciding what level of access to provide.
“There is no principled way of easily distinguishing between rooms that are a nonpublic forum and those that are no forum at all—particularly where the White House is not obligated to respond to any questions by reporters in the first place,” the agency wrote in a preliminary filing.
CBS News notes that, in The Associated Press case, an appellate panel quickly determined that the White House cannot ban journalists from spaces that are customarily “open to the press,” including brief rooms, based solely on perceptions of political hostility or otherwise “negative” coverage.
Sources
CNN, MS NOW and Politico sue to restore White House access
CNN, MS NOW and Politico sue Trump administration over White House access
DOJ fights lawsuit challenging Trump’s White House media ban: Access is a ‘privilege’
News outlets sue Trump over lost White House access, citing ‘blatant violation’ of First Amendment
Join the conversation!