1 hour ago
A US judge questioned the Trump administration's ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House. The case has sharpened a wider clash over press access, due process and editorial freedom.
Trump TV was launched hours after CNN, MS NOW and Politico sued over their exclusion from the White House. NYT also decided to not distribute photographs taken as part of the White House still photo pool
UPDATED: Sep 24, 2026 05:43 IST
US District Judge Timothy Kelly on Wednesday appeared skeptical of the Trump administration's decision to bar journalists from CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, saying the move did not appear to follow legal precedents requiring the news organisations to be given a meaningful opportunity to respond.
Kelly did not immediately rule on the outlets' request for a temporary restraining order to restore their access while their legal challenge proceeds. He said he would issue a decision soon.
The hearing came amid an escalating clash between the White House and the media. Trump announced the ban on Friday, accusing the three organisations of publishing what he called “fiction and lies” about his presidency.
JUDGE CITES EARLIER RULING
Kelly said the administration appeared not to have followed two previous rulings by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concerning the revocation of White House press access.
“Maybe they were wrongly decided, maybe they weren't,” Kelly said. “But as a district court judge I have to apply them.”
The judge also questioned the Justice Department's argument that letters sent to the news organisations on Tuesday gave them sufficient notice and an opportunity to respond.
“I don't know how a letter that they got after the pass was revoked could provide them with the notice,” Kelly said.
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CITES NATIONAL SECURITY
The Justice Department has defended the ban, arguing that access to the White House is a privilege rather than an entitlement and that Trump has the authority to suspend access.
Government lawyer Michael Velchik accused the outlets of publishing classified information and said their reporting raised national security concerns. The administration cited stories concerning US missile stockpiles, construction of Trump's White House ballroom and attendance at a Republican midterm convention.
The three news organisations have argued in their lawsuit that the ban violates First Amendment protections for freedom of speech and the press, as well as due-process rights.
Their lawyer, Theodore Boutrous, said Trump's own statements showed that the action was retaliation for reporting he disliked.
WHITE HOUSE LAUNCHES TRUMP TV
The dispute has coincided with the White House launching a 24/7 streaming platform called “Trump TV: The Essentials Station”, carrying continuous video of Trump, administration announcements, major presidential remarks and footage from his past public appearances.
The move followed Trump's decision to bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House. Major US television networks subsequently suspended their shared White House video pool in a show of solidarity with the organisations.
CASE ECHOES 2018 CNN DISPUTE
The legal battle also recalls a 2018 confrontation between Trump and CNN correspondent Jim Acosta. Kelly, whom Trump appointed in 2017, ordered the White House to restore Acosta's press pass after ruling that the administration had not followed fair procedures in revoking it. Trump, in a social media post on Monday, indicated regret over appointing Kelly and said he was bracing for a loss.
A coalition of press-freedom groups and news organisations, including Reuters, The Washington Post and Fox News, has backed the latest legal challenge, arguing that journalists cannot be denied access because of their editorial viewpoint.
- Ends
With inputs from Reuters
Published By:
Nitish Singh
Published On:
Sep 24, 2026 05:43 IST
