English
A federal judge has ordered the White House to immediately restore press access for CNN, MSNBC and Politico, ruling that President Donald Trump’s ban on the three news outlets most likely violates the Constitution. U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly issued a 14-day temporary restraining order early Thursday, allowing the outlets to resume White House access while their legal challenge continues.
Judge Finds Due Process Violations Likely
In his ruling, Judge Kelly wrote that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in their lawsuit against the Trump administration. He focused specifically on due process grounds, noting that the outlets’ press credentials were revoked last week without prior notice or any opportunity to respond. Trump, Kelly noted, did not dispute that the outlets “did not receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before their hard passes were revoked.”
Stay connected to every major update — subscribe and follow us on the PhoenixQ website and across our social media platforms.
Kelly also rejected the White House’s claim that national security concerns motivated the ban. The court found little evidence to support that argument. Instead, Kelly pointed directly to Trump’s own words when announcing the ban. “Certainly, that is not what President Trump said when he announced that he was ‘banning’ Plaintiffs from the White House — instead, he focused on the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity of Plaintiffs’ reporting,” Kelly wrote.
Trump announced the ban in a Truth Social post on Friday. He said it came “as a result of their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS.” He added that other outlets could face similar action. Shortly afterward, speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump referred to his own directive as “the ban on the free press.” He said, “I don’t want them in my office. I don’t want them here.” He also said the policy was not tied to any single report but reflected “cumulative stories over the last few years.”
Outlets Argue Retaliation and First Amendment Violations
The three news organizations argued in their lawsuit that Trump’s stated reasons reveal a clear pattern of retaliation. They said the ban was “intended to cow” them “into changing their reporting and threaten other journalists lest they suffer the same fate.” They further argued that the Constitution does not allow any government official to strip the press of First Amendment rights based solely on dislike of their reporting.
On Tuesday, the White House sent letters to the outlets offering them a chance to “contest this initial decision” in writing by Friday. The letters accused the organizations of publishing “sensitive security information, and misinformation” that “undermines the President’s ability to safeguard the national security.” They cited specific articles, including reports on munitions stockpiles, sanctions against Russia, a request for $1 billion in East Wing renovation funding, and a story about negative “vibes” at a recent Republican midterm convention.
However, Kelly dismissed those justifications. He wrote that the stories cited in the letters “are routine” and stretch back months or even years. He also found that the White House failed to meet the legal standard required to revoke a reporter’s hard pass. A prior D.C. Circuit Court ruling, also involving Trump, established that the government must first publish clear standards of conduct before revoking press credentials. Kelly found no formally articulated standards in the record. He added that one standard the White House appeared to offer was “so vague it hardly does the trick.”
Broad Industry Support for the Outlets
The case has drawn significant support from across the media industry. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the White House Correspondents’ Association, and a coalition of 49 news and media organizations filed a legal brief Wednesday backing the three outlets. NBCUniversal Media LLC, the parent company of NBC News, was among the signatories.
The brief argued that Trump’s stated reasons for the ban “are transparently viewpoint discriminatory” and conflict with the First Amendment. It also cited Supreme Court precedent, which holds that the government “may not deny a benefit to a person on a basis that infringes his constitutionally protected interests — especially, his interest in freedom of speech.” Meanwhile, the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from NBC News following the ruling.
Before Wednesday’s hearing, Trump posted on social media that he expected Judge Kelly — whom he nominated during his first term — to rule against him. Trump described Kelly as “totally disloyal” and said, “as usual, we’ll go for appeal.” NBC News previously reported that Trump’s Friday announcement caught several senior White House aides off guard, though one official later told NBC News that “nobody close to the President was surprised at his action to hold the fake news accountable.”
