Lawyers for three news organizations told a federal judge Thursday that the Trump administration’s ban on reporters from the White House must be blocked, calling the ban a classic example of “viewpoint discrimination” that punishes people for speaking out and violates the First Amendment rights of news organizations.
The hearing was the latest development in an escalating drama between the Trump administration and the press that has intensified on various fronts during his second term as president. But at its core, it’s about multiple free speech questions. The dispute resulted in sanctions and restrictions on White House and Pentagon reporters and led to several ongoing lawsuits through the federal court system.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly said he plans to rule by Tuesday, perhaps sooner, on whether to extend his order preserving access to the White House for reporters from MS NOW, CNN and Politico. Granting the media’s preliminary injunction would maintain the status quo, or maintain access, until the lawsuit is resolved.
Kelly, who was appointed to the court by Republican President Donald Trump, did not say what kind of ruling he intended to make, but said the government’s main argument at this stage of the case was an “uphill climb” and a “tough climb.” The judge also challenged government lawyers to specify the national security concerns the administration asserts.
“It’s always been clear that the issue is not just national security,” Justice Department attorney Michael Belchik said, arguing that false reporting can influence policy and harm national security.
“He doesn’t care if he has to get negative press. He has a problem with trafficking in verifiable falsehoods,” Belchik said of President Trump.
Theodore J. Boutras Jr., a lawyer for the media plaintiffs, said the government continues to discriminate against views and reporting it doesn’t like.
“He doesn’t like his policies to be scrutinized and he doesn’t like press coverage. He wants better coverage,” the media outlet’s lawyer, Boutras Jr., said in court. He said this is a content-based speech restriction and a clear violation of the First Amendment.
Belchik said the White House’s problems with banned news outlets’ reporting include “quotes that aren’t actually said,” the use of anonymous sources, and splicing together interviews to insert questions other than those actually asked by interviewees. “I think we’ve identified specific allegations for each individual news organization,” he said.
The three-week story continues
The lawsuit has been ongoing since last month, shortly after President Trump barred the press from the White House grounds, saying he opposed reporting.
The media outlet was hoping for long-term relief until the entire case is resolved, and the temporary restraining order was set to expire Thursday. But the judge gave an extension until Tuesday, saying he would decide whether to issue a preliminary injunction by then.
Kelly’s previous hearing came nearly three weeks after he was abruptly expelled from the White House grounds after CNN, MS NOW and Politico accused the president of “fake news.” A CNN spokesperson said the station was authorized to conduct pool operations Tuesday and the next one is scheduled for Sunday.
Although Mr. Kelly’s order allowed journalists to return, the administration continued to selectively exclude CNN from its duties in the White House broadcast pool. A CNN spokesperson said the station was authorized to conduct pool operations Tuesday and the next one is scheduled for Sunday.
Kelly had been granted a two-week temporary restraining order against the ban, which expires on Thursday. The news organizations asked the court to suspend the ban until the case is resolved, saying the administration has “continued to implement unexpected and inconsistent bans” despite the injunction, which includes blocking CNN from selectively participating in White House pool operations.
“The White House’s actions leave little doubt that, if given the opportunity, it will immediately reinstate a complete ban on CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO,” lawyers for the networks said in a Sept. 28 filing.
The question is whether the president or anyone else can punish news organizations for what they report. Media outlets argue that such conduct amounts to “viewpoint discrimination,” which is prohibited by the First Amendment’s free speech protections.
President Trump has insisted that there is no need to allow media outlets whose reporting he doesn’t like onto the White House grounds. “When it comes to the White House, it’s the people’s home,” Attorney General Todd Blanche said recently on ABC, citing a claim the administration has made from the beginning. “It’s a privilege to be there, not a right.”
News outlets argue that this approach violates constitutional amendments that protect free speech and due process.
Disclosure: CNBC and MS NOW are divisions of Versant Media.
