US judge blocks Trump's White House ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico

A US judge has ordered the White House to restore CNN, MS NOW and Politico access for now. The ruling sharpens the fight over press freedom, due process and Trump's media crackdown.

In Short

• The temporary restraining order will stay in force for 14 days
• Reporters said Secret Service still denied entry and seized press credentials
• The outlets argued the White House targeted coverage, violating First Amendment protections

A federal judge in the US has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump's ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, ordering that their access be restored immediately. In a late-night ruling, US District Judge Timothy Kelly said the three outlets had met the legal threshold for a temporary restraining order, which will remain in effect for 14 days.

However, a few hours after the order, reporters from all three outlets said they were still being denied entry to the White House. The outlets then asked in a court filing for an immediate hearing on their continued ban, saying a Secret Service agent had confiscated the journalists' credentials. The dispute is the latest escalation in Trump's confrontation with media organisations whose coverage he dislikes.

Trump first announced the ban on Friday, attacking what he called "fake news", and only later argued that the reporting of the three outlets posed a risk to national security. In a joint lawsuit, the outlets said the ban was a clear violation of the First Amendment because they were being singled out over the content of their coverage.

Kelly, who was nominated by Trump in 2017 and restored a CNN journalist's access in a similar case in 2018, said the White House must have clear standards for conduct that could lead to a press pass being revoked. He wrote that the standard of objectionable reporting set out in White House letters to the outlets was "so vague it hardly does the trick". He added: "This is a high bar, but Plaintiffs have met it." Kelly also rejected the administration's national security argument, writing, "Nothing in the record ... suggests that the revocation of Plaintiffs' hard passes was motivated by national security concerns."

The order came after an emergency hearing on Wednesday. Theodore Boutrous Jr., lawyer for the outlets, argued there was an urgent need to restore access because the ban was causing irreparable harm at a time of major news events. "We're at war. We have world leaders coming to Washington," he said. In an emailed statement after the ruling, Boutrous said, "This is a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law. We greatly appreciate the court's swift action." The White House did not respond to emails from The Associated Press seeking comment on the order and on whether it would allow the reporters back in.

Justice Department lawyer Michael Velchik defended the administration's position, saying the president has the authority to decide who gets into the White House. "Access to the White House is a privilege, not a right," Velchik said. Arguing that Trump had not engaged in viewpoint discrimination, he said the president had criticised other news organisations without banning them, noting that Trump had called ABC "the worst". He added, "The president should be able to take immediate action to protect national security." Boutrous responded, "Suddenly it's a national security case," and said Trump "keeps proving our point" by repeatedly citing negative coverage to justify the ban. Kelly appeared to agree, writing that when Trump announced the ban, he had focused on what he said was the lack of truthfulness and negativity in the outlets' reporting.

In a court filing on Tuesday, administration lawyers referred to letters sent to each outlet listing "a non-exhaustive list of reporting incidents, including those that have threatened national security and spread falsehoods". The examples cited included CNN's reporting on "top-secret" construction details linked to the East Wing bunker, MS NOW's reporting on an alleged leak investigation, and Politico publishing a document on funding for the White House ballroom that included detailed descriptions of Secret Service security improvements. Politico's letter also cited a June report in which a "senior administration official ... granted anonymity" predicted whether a preliminary deal would end the conflict with Iran. That appeared to refer to a background briefing arranged by the White House itself, where an official spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity under rules set by the administration. Several other outlets also reported those remarks.

The ban also prompted action from other media organisations. The US network press pool, made up of the five major networks including CNN, has suspended coverage of Trump pool events until further notice. Kelly's ruling did not cover that rotating pool. After Wednesday's hearing, the networks continued to refuse to air footage of Trump without assurances that CNN would be allowed into the White House pool. At Joint Base Andrews, where Trump formally welcomed Chinese President Xi Jinping, journalists from Fox News, CBS and NBC were present but were not shooting video. Other television outlets present, according to signs on their tripods and cameras, included NewsNation, Newsmax, Right Side Broadcasting Network, One America News and LindellTV. Ahead of the hearing, other news groups, including The AP, filed an amicus brief urging the court to immediately restore access for the three outlets.

The ruling has for now ordered the White House to restore access to CNN, MS NOW and Politico, while the legal challenge continues. But with the three outlets still saying they were blocked hours later, the dispute over press access and the administration's reasons for the ban remains unresolved.

With PTI Inputs

- Ends