News outlets seek court order to keep White House access amid Trump ban
Three media organizations barred from the White House have asked a federal judge to extend a temporary restraining order, arguing the ban violates First Amendment rights.
Three news outlets—CNN, MS NOW and Politico—filed a motion in federal court on Monday requesting that a temporary restraining order blocking President Trump's ban on their White House access be extended until the underlying lawsuit is resolved. The plaintiffs contend that the administration has continued to enforce the ban inconsistently, including removing CNN from the White House television pool and denying it access to Air Force One.
"The White House's words and actions leave little doubt that it will immediately reinstitute a complete ban of CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO if allowed the opportunity," the filing said.
The attorneys for the outlets argue that the ban constitutes unlawful retaliation and viewpoint discrimination, infringing on First Amendment freedoms and causing irreparable harm to both the plaintiffs and the public. They note that a two-week temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly last week, which restored the outlets' access, is set to expire on Oct. 8.
The Trump administration maintains that White House access is a privilege, not a right. Attorney General Todd Blanche told reporters that the president can decide who may accompany him on Air Force One and that misinformation from certain outlets poses a national-security concern.
Judge Kelly previously expressed skepticism that national-security claims were the true motive for the ban. The new filing also highlights the importance of the broadcast pool, which traditionally rotates coverage among the five major networks, and argues that the exclusion of CNN disrupted this system without any official explanation.
Other members of the pool have responded on a case-by-case basis, with some networks continuing coverage while CNN remains sidelined. Legal scholars note the dilemma facing broadcasters: balancing press-freedom principles against practical challenges of prolonged access restrictions.