The US Justice Department has defended President Donald Trump’s decision to bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, arguing that access to restricted presidential areas is a privilege rather than a constitutional right
The department made its arguments in a court filing ahead of a Wednesday, September 23, hearing in Washington, where the three media organisations are seeking an immediate restoration of their White House access while their lawsuit proceeds. Trump announced the ban last Friday, accusing the outlets of repeatedly publishing what he described as “fake news” and saying they would no longer be permitted access to the White House.
The decision was implemented the following day, when journalists from CNN, MS NOW and Politico were denied entry to White House grounds and their credentials were deactivated. The three organisations subsequently sued the Trump administration, arguing that the ban violates protections for freedom of speech and the press under the First Amendment.
They are seeking a temporary restraining order that would allow their journalists to return to the White House while the broader legal challenge is considered. “This ban could not be a more direct assault on the First Amendment nor a more blatant violation of our most fundamental constitutional principles,” the outlets argued in their filing.
The Justice Department disputes that position, maintaining that the president has authority over journalists’ access to restricted areas of the White House, including spaces such as the Oval Office. “Access to the White House is a privilege — not a right,” the department said in its filing.
According to the government, the White House sent letters to the three organisations explaining the reasons for their exclusion and identifying reporting it alleged had “threatened national security and spread falsehoods.” CNN said the allegations against it included reporting about Trump’s plans to construct a bunker beneath the East Wing ballroom and coverage of the Iran war.
The news organisations dispute the administration’s characterisation of their reporting. CNN has said it stands behind its White House journalists and their coverage. Trump initially announced the ban on Truth Social, saying media organisations should not be permitted to repeatedly publish what he considers false information while covering the president.
The three outlets argue that the administration is retaliating against them because of their reporting and that allowing the ban to stand could permit the government to determine which news organisations receive access based on their coverage. The dispute has also affected pooled coverage of the president.
Major US television networks suspended their participation in the White House television press pool after CNN was prevented from carrying out a scheduled pool assignment. The pool normally allows a rotating group of journalists to provide coverage that is shared with other news organisations.
Despite being barred from the White House, journalists from the affected organisations continued covering Trump during his visit to the United Nations General Assembly in New York using UN-issued credentials. Trump questioned CNN’s presence while speaking to reporters at the UN on Tuesday, September 22, telling the network’s journalists: “I’m surprised that CNN is here covering me, you shouldn’t be here.”
The case is being heard by US District Judge Timothy Kelly, who was appointed to the federal bench by Trump during his first term. The court is expected to consider whether to temporarily restore the outlets’ White House access while their lawsuit challenging the ban continues.
The administration maintains that the restrictions are within the president’s authority, while CNN, MS NOW and Politico contend that excluding them because of their journalism amounts to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. No final determination has yet been made on the merits of those competing claims.