10
Loading video...
By Dan Gooding
Associate News Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
A federal judge temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico early Thursday, ordering the administration to immediately restore the outlets’ White House press credentials.
U.S. District Judge Timothy James Kelly, who was appointed by Trump during his first term, issued a temporary restraining order preventing officials from enforcing the ban for 14 days while the outlets’ legal challenge proceeds. The order does not finally resolve the lawsuit.
Kelly found that the news organizations were likely to succeed in showing that the administration failed to provide the due process required before revoking their access.
Read More on Politics
The outlets had not received advance notice or an opportunity to challenge the decision before their hard passes were deactivated and confiscated, he said.
It temporarily restores White House access for journalists and producers from the three organizations, who were barred from the complex last week after Trump accused them of reporting “FICTION and LIES.”
Kelly also rejected, at this stage of the case, the administration’s argument that the restrictions were justified by national-security concerns.
“The record lacks factual support for defendants’ contention that the revocation of plaintiffs’ hard passes will in fact protect national security or that national security will be endangered if the court orders their passes reinstated while this litigation proceeds,” the judge wrote.
He noted that Trump’s stated reason for announcing the ban focused instead on what the president described as the outlets’ lack of truthfulness and the negative tenor of their coverage.
Attorneys for the affected media outlets told the judge there had been no "semblance of due process" and framed the ban as punishment handed down by the president, calling it "clear retaliation" during the hearing.
They argued that Trump's legal team had to come up with an argument and rationale for the ban after he posted to Truth Social last Friday.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) had argued that White House access is "a privilege—not a right," that "there is no such due process or First Amendment right attaching to these credentials," and that the president should have greater discretion over press access.
It also insisted Trump’s actions were justified because the outlets failed its "minimum requirements of professionalism" and published sensitive national security information.
...
Why Did Donald Trump Ban CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House?
In a post on Truth Social Friday, the president said the three outlets would not be permitted at the White House "as a result of their constant 'reporting' FAKE NEWS!"
"Other Fake News Media Outlets to follow," Trump added.
The announcement sparked confusion Friday night about whether the ban would take effect, but on Saturday, staff from Politico, CNN, and MS NOW were walked off White House property.
In a press release Monday, the White House said, "The First Amendment protects their right to publish; it does not entitle them to a hard pass, briefing room seat, or place in the press pool." The release went on to highlight Democratic presidents' criticism of right-leaning media, including Fox News.
Trump has frequently returned to his "fake news" message over the years, which began as a criticism of fabricated stories but has become a catchphrase aimed at outlets and reporters he does not like, particularly during his second term.
Related Story
I Watched Trump TV for a Day—This Is What I Learned
National, Local Outlets Back Banned Organizations
In a joint filing Wednesday, a group of dozens of media outlets, from The New York Times to Fox News, to regional newspapers and TV, led by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the White House Correspondents' Association, showed their support for CNN, Politico, and MS NOW.
The group also laid out similar arguments to those put forward by attorneys representing the affected outlets, calling the president's move unconstitutional. They argued that White House access could not be determined by whether the administration was receiving favorable coverage.
The list of those on the brief reflected a variety of outlets, some of which tend to publish news with viewpoints different from the affected group, highlighting a rare moment of unity across the media.
Did Barack Obama Ban Fox News From the White House?
In the wake of Trump's announcement, Republicans and administration officials have claimed that former President Barack Obama made a similar move during his term, banning Fox News from the White House.
Obama did often criticize the network, which leans to the right, and there was a notable attempt to keep Fox away from an interview in 2009, but he did not outright ban it from the White House.
In October 2009, the White House tried to exclude Fox News only from interviewing executive-pay czar Kenneth R. Feinberg. The attempt sparked immediate pushback from other outlets, who said they would not attend if Fox was kept away, and the decision was reversed.
What Obama Has Said About the Ban
Obama criticized the restrictions and contrasted them with how his administration treated Fox News as he spoke at an event at Colgate University in New York on Friday.
"I'm trying to think what would have happened if I had said, 'You know what, Fox News, you're out of here,'" Obama said. "It's unimaginable."
"If you have a certain cohort—let's call it 30-35 percent of the country right now—which thinks that's OK, well, what that means is we have not developed the kind of understanding of what democracy requires," he added. "And we've gotta shore that back up."
The president's announcement also drew criticism from First Amendment advocates, including Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
In a statement previously shared with Newsweek, Stern said it was "difficult to imagine a more blatant violation of the First Amendment than Trump banning news outlets from the People’s House for reporting critically on the government.
"It’s also hard to imagine a dumber move. The historically unpopular president has been retaliating against the press for years, but it hasn’t helped him," Stern said. "Journalists keep exposing his corruption and his failures. These outrageous attacks only demonstrate how scared he is of an informed public."
What Happens Next
Kelly's decision was still pending Wednesday evening, although he appeared to understand time was an important factor in reaching a conclusion.
Read Judge Kelly's Order in Full
Newsweek’s reporters and editors used Martyn, our AI assistant, to produce this story. Learn more about Martyn here.
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Gray R. Thomas
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines