The battle between Donald Trump and the American press returned to a Washington courtroom on Thursday, October 8, as CNN, MS NOW and Politico asked a federal judge to keep the White House from barring their journalists — a fight over more than 70 revoked press passes that has become the biggest press-freedom clash of Trump's second term.
How the ban started
On September 18, Trump announced on Truth Social that he was banning CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House over what he called "FAKE NEWS" coverage. Within a day or two, more than 70 journalists had their hard passes revoked. The outlets sued within days, arguing the ban was blatant retaliation for critical coverage and violated their First Amendment free-speech rights and their Fifth Amendment right to due process.
On September 24, US District Judge Timothy Kelly — a Trump appointee — temporarily blocked the ban, ordering the passes restored. Kelly said the outlets were likely to succeed in showing their credentials were revoked without due process, and called the White House's standard for objectionable reporting "so vague it hardly does the trick."
Both sides make their case
Attorney Theodore Boutrous, representing the outlets, told the court the ban is unconstitutional retaliation: "Here we have the unusual situation where the president himself has said he wants to chill speech. He wants to coerce better coverage." The outlets say the administration has kept enforcing the ban selectively even under court order — including keeping CNN out of broadcast pool duties and barring Politico from an Air Force One trip to Nebraska on October 5.
The Justice Department, represented by Michael Velchik, defended the ban as fair and justified. Velchik argued the outlets endangered national security by publishing classified information — citing stories about construction of Trump's White House ballroom and turnout at the recent Republican midterm convention — and failed professional journalistic standards. He called the White House a "sacred space" the president controls. Attorney General Todd Blanche has maintained that access to the White House is a privilege, not a right.
What the judge decides next
At Thursday's hearing, Kelly appeared skeptical of the government's arguments but extended his earlier order until Tuesday, October 13, giving himself time to decide whether to grant longer-term protection while the case plays out. A final ruling on the constitutional claims could set a precedent for how far any president can go in punishing coverage they dislike — with the November 3 midterm elections just weeks away and Trump's approval at the lowest of his political career, the stakes extend well beyond three newsrooms.
Music in this post's reel: Kevin MacLeod - Hitman (incompetech.com), licensed under CC BY 3.0
Sources: Reuters, USA Today, NPR, Associated Press