Federal Judge to Decide if White House Must Bow to Demands of CNN, Politico and MS NOW Over Press Passes
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A federal judge held an emergency hearing after CNN, Politico, and MS NOW sued the White House for suspending their press credentials, raising questions about media entitlement and national security.
U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly, appointed by President Trump, conducted an emergency hearing Wednesday after CNN, Politico, and MS NOW—three outlets known for their relentless hostility toward the administration—sued to regain their permanent White House press passes. The judge suggested that the administration’s decision might have impacted the outlets’ due-process rights, despite courts previously affirming the executive branch’s authority over press access.
"The White House appears to have violated the news outlets' constitutional right of due process," Kelly remarked, though the issue remains contentious.
Attorney Theodore J. Boutrous, representing the media organizations, claimed the ban was imposed without procedural safeguards and infringed on First Amendment protections. He argued that the action was retaliation for the outlets’ critical coverage of the president and insisted the media companies were suffering irreparable harm, especially during ongoing international events.
The Justice Department, represented by Michael Velchik, firmly countered that White House access is a privilege, not a right, and cited pressing national-security concerns. They referenced letters criticizing the outlets’ recent reporting on sensitive issues, including a proposed underground bunker, talks with Iran, and political convention commentary—matters where responsible reporting is essential to national interests.
Boutrous dismissed the timing of the security rationale, suggesting it was an afterthought. Judge Kelly did not issue an immediate ruling, stating he would review the arguments and decide as soon as possible, as the administration defends its right to maintain security and order.