A federal judge has granted a preliminary injunction barring President Trump’s team from booting CNN, Politico and MS NOW from coverage at the White House, firming up his previous restraining order.
Judge Timothy Kelly issued the order late Tuesday, saying the news outlets have a strong case that the White House not only trampled on their First Amendment rights but shortchanged their due process by denying them a proper procedure to challenge their banishment.
He said his decision doesn’t mean that Mr. Trump is wrong about unfair news coverage — the reason he gave for ousting the outlets — but the judge said summarily stripping their passes doesn’t meet constitutional muster.
People were interested in these podcasts
Judge Kelly said the president sought to punish the outlets for the tenor of their coverage. He said a government agency cannot do that.
“President Trump likely banned plaintiffs from the White House because he believes that their reporting is generally inaccurate and biased against him,” the judge concluded.
He also rejected the White House’s later justification that the outlets were barred because they published sensitive information. He said that’s not the reason Mr. Trump gave.
Judge Kelly had previously issued a temporary restraining order, which is a short-term directive. A preliminary injunction, meanwhile, will last until either the judge issues a final ruling or a higher court erases the injunction.
The White House had stripped journalists from the three news organizations of their “hard passes.” Those are permanent credentials that allow the journalists access to the White House press room and an outside area where cameras can broadcast with the main White House structure in the background.
News organizations say that access is critical to reporting and argue that stripping credentials denied them a thing of value — thus the need for due process.
The White House challenged that notion, saying the press doesn’t have a “liberty interest” in the passes.
But Judge Kelly said that argument had previously been settled by the circuit court in Washington, which ruled in favor of the press.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.