Justice Department Shields White House's Authoritarian Ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico
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.
The DOJ claims the president can exclude three major news outlets from the White House, citing a so-called 'compelling interest,' as a federal judge considers whether to extend a restraining order that temporarily restored press access.
The Justice Department has filed a brief defending President Donald Trump's blatant attempt to silence dissenting voices by excluding CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House grounds. The administration cynically claims the outlets failed to meet a 'minimum requirement of professionalism,' a thinly veiled excuse for targeting critical journalism. The DOJ relies on a 1977 D.C. Circuit decision, Sherrill v. Knight, twisting its meaning to justify the president's power to restrict access under the guise of a 'compelling interest.'
Last month, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, was forced to issue a temporary restraining order to reinstate hard passes for dozens of reporters from the three organizations. The news outlets are now asking the court to extend that order with a preliminary injunction, arguing that the administration's ban is a direct assault on their First and Fifth Amendment rights and an attack on press freedom.
'The statements also make clear he implemented the ban to coerce more favorable coverage and to deter other journalists,' the outlets' legal team wrote, exposing the administration's ongoing retaliation even after the restraining order was issued.
The DOJ's argument is that Sherrill does not prevent the president from demanding journalists rely on identified sources, maintain factual accuracy, and give the White House a chance to comment—an attempt to control the narrative and suppress stories involving classified or sensitive national-security information, regardless of the public's right to know.
Judge Kelly observed that the White House failed to provide due process before revoking the passes, and that the letters cited by the DOJ were sent only after the ban was already in place. He also pointed out that some of the stories used as justification had nothing to do with national security, calling the administration's reasoning ambiguous and unconvincing.
A hearing on the outlets' motion for a preliminary injunction is scheduled for Thursday, as the fight for a free press continues against an administration bent on silencing opposition.