CNN, MS NOW and Politico have filed a federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump and members of his administration, challenging the decision to bar their journalists from the White House.
The three media organizations argue that the ban violates protections guaranteed under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, including freedom of the press. They are asking a federal court in Washington, D.C., to issue a temporary restraining order restoring their access to the White House while the case proceeds.
The lawsuit was filed on Monday, September 21, after the White House revoked the journalists’ access following Trump’s announcement that CNN, MS NOW and Politico would no longer be permitted on the White House grounds.
Follow PenTalk News
Get breaking news, important updates and the latest stories directly on your phone.
In a joint statement, the organizations said the government should not determine what news organizations report or publish. They argued that allowing the ban to stand could have broader implications for independent journalism and press access to government officials.
Trump announced the restrictions on social media on Friday, accusing the three outlets of repeatedly publishing what he described as “fake news.” He later defended the decision, saying his administration was targeting what he considers false reporting rather than the free press.
Trump also described the media as a national security concern in a subsequent social media post, although the statement did not identify specific evidence supporting that claim.
The Trump administration has maintained that access to the White House is not an automatic right for news organizations.
The administration said the affected outlets remain free to report on the president and his administration from outside the White House, while arguing that the government is not required to provide them with special access.
The White House Correspondents’ Association, however, called for the journalists’ access to be restored, warning that allowing the government to exclude a news organization because of its coverage could establish a precedent affecting other media outlets.
The dispute has also affected the television press pool, a system through which major television networks share responsibility for recording and distributing footage of presidential events.
CNN is one of the organizations participating in the pool alongside ABC, CBS, Fox News and NBC. Following the ban, the major television networks announced that they would suspend pool coverage of presidential events rather than continue without CNN.
The dispute came as the White House launched a video stream featuring footage and material highlighting what the administration describes as its achievements.
The move has drawn criticism from press-freedom advocates. Jameel Jaffer, executive director of Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute, said the initiative could result in the public receiving a predominantly government-produced account of presidential activities.
The White House’s own video feed was also used as an alternative source of footage after the television networks suspended their traditional pool arrangement. During a Monday event marking the opening of a new Marine One helipad, however, the audio from the White House stream was reportedly inaudible.
The latest confrontation follows several previous disputes between Trump’s administration and major news organizations.
The Associated Press has separately challenged restrictions placed on its White House access after the news agency declined to adopt the administration’s preferred terminology for the Gulf of Mexico. The administration has also imposed restrictions affecting journalists covering the Pentagon.
During Trump’s first presidency, the White House attempted to revoke the press credentials of CNN correspondent Jim Acosta and Playboy correspondent Brian Karem. Federal judges subsequently ordered the administration to restore their access.
The latest lawsuit has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, who was appointed by Trump in 2017. Kelly previously ruled against the Trump administration in the 2018 dispute involving Acosta’s White House press credentials.
The case is expected to receive an expedited hearing as the three news organizations seek an immediate restoration of access. The legal dispute could become a significant test of the limits of presidential control over access to the White House and the constitutional protections afforded to the press.
