Judge extends order allowing CNN, Politico, MS NOW White House press access

A federal court has ordered that three news organizations, CNN, MS NOW and Politico, which lost White House access because of a ban imposed by US President Donald Trump, be allowed back in. Their access must remain in place until the lawsuit challenging the ban is finally resolved.

US District Judge Tim Kelly issued the order on Tuesday (October 13).

The court observed that if the outlets’ access was revoked because of their reporting and opinions, the move could violate the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. The judge said Trump’s public statements suggest the decision was made because of the nature of the outlets’ coverage and their alleged bias against him.

Judge Kelly also questioned the Justice Department’s argument that the ban was imposed in the interest of national security. In his view, no evidence was presented in court that national security was the reason for revoking access from the outset. Trump himself also did not publicly cite national security as the basis for the decision. The court therefore needs to consider whether the ban was an attempt to punish outlets with a particular viewpoint.

Earlier in the case, Kelly had ordered the outlets’ access restored on the grounds that due legal process had not been followed. The White House later sent letters to the outlets explaining the reasons for the ban and giving them a chance to respond. But in the judge’s view, taking such a step after access had already been revoked did not fully cure the earlier legal defect. The earlier order was due to expire on Tuesday, but the new order allows the outlets’ access to continue.

After announcing the ban on September 18, Trump repeatedly criticized the outlets’ coverage as negative and one-sided. In court filings, the Justice Department cited reports on the Iran war, the construction of a ballroom in the White House’s East Wing and the Republican Party convention ahead of the midterm elections. Although the filings sought to link these reports to the rationale for the ban, questions have been raised over whether national security was considered from the start.

At the hearing, lawyers for the outlets argued that such a ban not only limits the work of the affected outlets’ journalists but can also create a chilling effect among other reporters. Justice Department lawyer Michael Velchik countered that the president has the authority to control journalists’ access to the White House. Ted Boutrous Jr., a lawyer for the outlets, said Trump himself made the decision to impose the ban and had spoken publicly about it.

The Trump administration can appeal Judge Kelly’s new order. Until the case is finally resolved, the court’s order on the outlets’ access adds a new dimension to the ongoing debate in the United States over press freedom, presidential power and government accountability.