Judge Considers Restoring CNN, Politico, MS NOW White House Access

White House Press Passes Under Scrutiny in Federal Court

The legal dispute over White House press access has taken a new turn as a federal judge appears ready to order the temporary reinstatement of press passes for journalists from CNN, Politico, and MS NOW. This development follows a lawsuit filed by the news outlets challenging their recent ban from the White House.

During an emergency hearing on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly, who was appointed by former President Trump in 2017, suggested that the White House might have infringed upon the constitutional rights of the journalists by revoking their access without due process. This assertion is based on precedents set by earlier court decisions.

Theodore J. Boutrous, representing the three media organizations, argued that the ban was imposed “without a semblance of due process.” He contended that the action violated the First Amendment rights of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, describing it as a retaliatory measure for their coverage of the administration. Boutrous labeled it as “probably the clearest case in history” of viewpoint discrimination.

President Trump, while threatening the ban, remarked, “They purposely write negative news, and they do that because they want to try and diminish the Republicans and a Republican administration.”

In a climate of global tension, with the President’s meeting with China’s leader Xi Jinping approaching, Boutrous highlighted the irreversible damage inflicted on the news organizations by their exclusion from the White House.

Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik countered, asserting that White House access is a “privilege,” not a right, and cited national security concerns as justification for the ban. The legal briefs submitted by the department referenced White House communications criticizing the news outlets’ reporting on various issues, including the construction of a “top secret” bunker and the atmosphere of a recent Republican convention in Dallas. More details can be found here.

Boutrous dismissed these claims, noting that national security was cited only after the ban had been enforced. He commented, “I guess the light bulb went off and they all decided ‘Start talking about national security.'”

Judge Kelly has yet to issue a ruling, stating he will deliberate on both arguments before reaching a decision.