A broadcast news workspace seen outside the White House on September 23, 2026 in Washington, DC.
Alex Roblewski AFP | Getty Images
A videoconference court hearing into President Donald Trump’s controversial ban on three news organizations from the White House began Wednesday afternoon.
Judge Timothy Kelly is considering requests from media outlets including MS NOW, CNN and Politico to block President Trump from continuing to ban him from the White House.
Lawsuits by news organizations argue that the ban violates the First Amendment, which protects the right to a free press by punishing the content of stories reported about President Trump and his administration.
“This is a clear case of retaliation,” Theodore Boutros, an attorney representing both media outlets, argued to Kelly during Wednesday’s hearing.
The Justice Department said in a filing late Tuesday night that Trump had banned the news outlet, citing national security concerns, and that the president had a legal right to do so. President Trump did not mention the basis for the ban when he announced it last Friday.
At the beginning of the hearing, Kelly pointed to a 1977 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that held that news organizations are entitled to due process in any decisions that affect their holding of a so-called hard pass to the White House.
The three media outlets received no warning until President Trump announced he was considering eliminating hard pass access.
“Since we’re talking about a pre-deprivation process, I think it’s fair to say that process … was not followed here,” Kelly said.
The justices noted that the Justice Department defended President Trump’s ban, arguing that the 1977 ruling was wrong.
“There was no such thing as due process here,” Boutros said. “This happened completely out of the blue.”
The lawyer said Trump’s public statements about the ban substantiate the news organizations’ claims that they are being targeted for “viewpoint discrimination” because of the way they report on the president and his administration.
Boutros said Trump said he implemented the ban because “the reporting was too negative” and “intentionally negative” in posts on Truth Social and in the Oval Office.
“He keeps saying the same thing,” Boutros said. “He continues to prove our case. He is literally our chief witness here.”
Responding to the Justice Department’s argument that the ban was justified on national security grounds, Boutros said, “They are literally saying that reporters should not be subject to national security scrutiny.”
The lawyer said the First Amendment protects the media’s right to report on its subjects because “journalists can and should hold the government accountable.”
“Access to the White House is a privilege, not a right,” Justice Department lawyer Michael Belchik said at the outset of his argument against Kelly.
In a court filing Tuesday, the Justice Department appears to have responded to the news organizations’ claims that they were denied due process by attaching three separate letters to each news organization citing the basis for what it called an “initial” ban and giving them until this Friday to respond in order to avoid a permanent ban.
Kelly was appointed by President Trump during his first term to the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., and could issue a ruling at any time.
Mr. Kelly ruled against the White House in 2018, ordering it to reinstate then-CNN correspondent Jim Acosta’s access pass, which he had revoked following a controversial exchange with Mr. Trump.
In announcing the ban Friday, President Trump said he condemned “cumulative” articles containing so-called “fake news” about him and his administration.
The ban went into effect on Saturday, when reporters from the media had their access passes confiscated by the Secret Service when they arrived at the White House.
Three news organizations jointly filed charges against Trump on Monday.
Disclosure: CNBC and MS NOW are divisions of Versant Media.
This is breaking news. Please check the latest information.
