The standoff over White House press access shifted again Thursday when reporters from CNN, MS NOW and Politico were allowed back onto the grounds after a federal judge ordered the administration to restore their credentials.
The White House ban had kept journalists from the three organizations outside the complex for several days, setting up a federal court fight over press access, due process and the First Amendment. According to The Associated Press, reporters from all three outlets were back on White House grounds Thursday afternoon after initially encountering problems entering earlier in the day.
Trump announced the restrictions the previous Friday while criticizing the organizations as “fake news,” according to the Associated Press. The administration later argued that some of their reporting raised national security concerns, while CNN, MS NOW and Politico sued, arguing that they had been targeted because of the content of their journalism.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly issued a temporary restraining order directing officials to “immediately return, reinstate, and restore” the outlets’ access. The order remains in effect for 14 days while the broader lawsuit continues.
“This is a high bar, but Plaintiffs have met it,” Kelly wrote, according to Reuters. Kelly found that the outlets were likely to succeed on their argument that the removal of their credentials violated constitutional due process protections.
The dispute also centered on what standards the government can use when deciding whether to revoke a journalist’s White House credentials. According to the Associated Press, Kelly said officials need clear standards governing conduct that could result in losing access. He described the administration’s stated standard involving objectionable reporting as “so vague it hardly does the trick.”
Kelly also questioned the administration’s national security explanation.
“Nothing in the record … suggests that the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes was motivated by national security concerns,” he wrote.
The judge later added, “Certainly, that is not what President Trump said when he announced that he was ‘banning’ Plaintiffs from the White House — instead, he focused on the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity of Plaintiffs’ reporting.”
Attorney Theodore Boutrous Jr., representing the outlets, praised the temporary order.
“This is a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law,” Boutrous said in a statement reported by the Associated Press. “We greatly appreciate the court’s swift action.”
Before reporters ultimately returned Thursday afternoon, the outlets told the court that journalists were still encountering problems accessing the White House. Reuters reported that CNN, Politico and MS NOW requested an emergency follow-up hearing after saying the administration had not immediately complied with Kelly’s order.
During arguments in the case, Boutrous emphasized the importance of immediate access during a packed international news cycle.
“We’re at war. We have world leaders coming to Washington.”
Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik defended the administration’s authority over access.
“Access to the White House is a privilege, not a right,” Velchik said.
Velchik argued that criticism alone did not prove viewpoint discrimination because Trump had criticized other organizations without removing them. He pointed to Trump calling ABC “the worst.”
“The president should be able to take immediate action to protect national security,” Velchik said, according to the Associated Press.
Boutrous challenged that explanation during the hearing.
“Suddenly it’s a national security case,” he said, adding that Trump “keeps proving our point” through his public comments about coverage from the three organizations.
Administration lawyers had also submitted letters detailing what they described as “a non-exhaustive list of reporting incidents, including those that have threatened national security and spread falsehoods.”
According to the Associated Press, those examples included CNN reporting on “‘top-secret’ construction details related to the East Wing bunker”; MS NOW reporting “on an alleged leak investigation”; and Politico publishing “a document detailing funding for the White House ballroom containing intricate descriptions of how the Secret Service would invest in security improvements.”
The administration also cited a Politico report involving a “senior administration official … granted anonymity.” The Associated Press reported that the comments appeared to come from a background briefing organized by the White House itself, during which journalists were instructed to attribute the remarks anonymously.
The White House ban also affected the broader television press pool. Reuters reported that major network journalists had declined to record or distribute certain pooled coverage while the three organizations remained excluded, adding another layer to the dispute over how the White House manages media access.
For now, CNN, MS NOW and Politico have regained access, but Kelly’s ruling is temporary. The lawsuit continues, leaving the court to consider the larger constitutional questions surrounding the government’s ability to revoke established press credentials and whether officials can base those decisions on objections to a news organization’s reporting.