ع
The three news organizations notified the government of their plans to file suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia where they will request a temporary restraining order to reinstate credentials for their reporters. According to a joint statement from the outlets the action seeks to defend the principle that the government cannot decide what the press reports or publishes. The organizations argued that the revocation of access without notice or process threatens both press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism free from interference.
President Donald Trump declared the ban on the three outlets in a Truth Social post on Friday citing what he described as constant fake news and negative coverage over recent years. A Politico report detailed how reporters from CNN, MS NOW and Politico were denied entry to the White House complex on Saturday with their credentials confiscated by the Secret Service. CNN was also removed from its scheduled duties as the television pool representative for major networks this week according to accounts from the network itself.
Trump provided additional comments on the decision during an Oval Office photo opportunity on Friday. “It’s really just cumulative stories over the last few years,” Trump said according to a New York Times dispatch. “You get sick of it. They’re smart people, but they purposely write negative news.”
The lawsuit targets Trump along with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Communications Director Steven Cheung and Secret Service Director Sean Curran. The New York Times reported that the complaint frames the ban as viewpoint discrimination carried out in retaliation for coverage the president viewed as negative while aiming to chill future reporting. Reuters coverage noted that the filing requests an emergency hearing that could occur in the coming days before a judge in Washington.
Similar disputes arose during Trump’s first term when the revocation of a CNN reporter’s press pass in 2018 led to a lawsuit that secured temporary reinstatement of access a CNN account from that period recalled. First Amendment experts consulted by The New York Times assessed the current measures as unlikely to survive court review based on precedents prohibiting government retaliation tied to journalistic content. One cited example from 1977 involved the revocation of a reporter’s credentials over critical coverage and was referenced in legal analyses of the latest case.
The White House Correspondents’ Association issued a statement underscoring that press protections under the Constitution do not hinge on whether a president approves of an outlet’s coverage according to a Reuters summary. Each of the three organizations had previously vowed to defend their rights and continue reporting regardless of physical access limitations. The developments follow a pattern of heightened tensions between the administration and certain segments of the media since Trump took office earlier this year.
