Justice Department lawyers on Tuesday defended President Trump's move to bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, telling a federal district court in Washington, D.C., in a filing that the revocation of the outlets' press credentials is legally sound. The filing answers a lawsuit the three news organizations filed Monday over the ban, and a hearing on whether their credentials will be restored is set for Wednesday afternoon before U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly.
Justice Department Defends Trump's White House Press Ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico
Justice Department lawyers on Tuesday defended President Trump's move to bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, telling a federal district court in Washington, D.C., in a filing that the revocation of the outlets' press credentials is legally sound. The filing answers a lawsuit the three news organizations filed Monday over the ban, and a hearing on whether their credentials will be restored is set for Wednesday afternoon before U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly.
Reporters for CNN, MS NOW and Politico were stripped of their press credentials, also called "hard passes," denying them access to the White House grounds. The Justice Department submitted to the court letters from the White House press office, dated Tuesday, notifying each of the three outlets that the president had decided to revoke their journalists' hard passes and giving them a deadline of 5 p.m. Friday to respond to its claims.
The three outlets sued Mr. Trump and three top administration officials on Monday: Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff; Steven Cheung, the White House communications director; and Sean Curran, the head of the Secret Service. They asked Judge Kelly, appointed to the federal bench by Mr. Trump during his first term, to rule quickly to allow them access to the White House again, arguing the ban violated their due process rights because Mr. Trump provided no notice and no opportunity to oppose the ban before it was announced and their credentials were confiscated.
Judge Kelly oversaw a lawsuit brought by former CNN reporter Jim Acosta during the first Trump administration after the White House moved to revoke his press credential. The judge sided with Acosta after CNN sued and ordered his press pass restored, finding Acosta's due process rights under the Fifth Amendment had been violated. The White House complied with the order, and CNN dropped the lawsuit shortly afterward.
Mr. Trump has also barred The Associated Press from attending certain White House events after the news outlet refused to conform to his proclamation that changed the name of the Gulf of Mexico to "Gulf of America." The wire service sued on First Amendment grounds. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., initially ruled the White House must restore the outlet's access, and an appeals court later allowed the ban to take effect; the litigation is ongoing. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit's ruling hinged on the fact that the AP was blocked from restricted spaces such as the Oval Office and Air Force One that only a small subset of the White House press corps can access, a narrower policy than the outright ban imposed on CNN, MS NOW and Politico. In a 2-1 decision, the two judges in the majority, Neomi Rao and Gregory Katsas, said the White House cannot ban journalists from spaces that are "generally open to the press," such as the briefing room, based on their viewpoint. Mr. Trump appointed both to the D.C. Circuit in his first term.
Since Mr. Trump returned to the White House for his second term, his press office has assumed control of the press pool, the rotating group of journalists who cover the president every day and disseminate information and footage to other news outlets. CNN is a member of the television pool system, which also includes CBS News, ABC News, NBC News and Fox News, and was scheduled to travel with Mr. Trump to New York on Monday for the United Nations General Assembly. The network, which was set to provide coverage in the TV pool slot, was kicked off the trip because of the ban, and the four other networks in the rotation decided to suspend the television pool altogether.
- The source does not state the specific articles or reporting on which the White House based the ban.
- The source does not state whether the White House has identified or produced the classified or sensitive material it says the outlets published.
- The source does not state the date on which the reporters' hard passes were revoked.
- The source does not state how the three outlets responded to the White House letters or to the 5 p.m. Friday deadline.
- The source does not state the outcome of the Wednesday hearing before U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly.
- The source does not identify the news organizations that joined the amicus brief beyond CBS News, or state how many signed on.