DOJ Defends Trump’s Authority to Bar News Outlets from White House Over Professionalism Standards

The Justice Department has argued that President Donald Trump possesses the legal authority to exclude CNN, MSNBC, and Politico from White House access, contending that these outlets failed to meet basic professional standards expected of journalists covering the executive branch.

Last month, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order requiring the White House to restore press credentials for dozens of reporters from the three affected organizations. The news outlets are now seeking to convert that short-term measure into a preliminary injunction, arguing that the administration’s ban violates their First and Fifth Amendment protections.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, who was appointed by President Trump, indicated that he must follow established precedent from the 1977 D.C. Circuit case Sherrill v. Knight, which determined that “the protection afforded to newsgathering under the First Amendment’s guarantee of press freedom requires that such access not be denied arbitrarily or for less than compelling reasons.”

In a recent court filing, Justice Department attorneys maintained that the Sherrill ruling does not prevent the President from restricting access when news organizations engage in conduct that threatens national security or undermines the White House’s operational integrity. They argued that legitimate journalism involves verifying facts, protecting confidential sources appropriately, and providing subjects with opportunities to respond before publication.

The news organizations’ legal team, led by prominent attorney Theodore Boutrous Jr., strongly disputed the government’s characterization, arguing in their own filing that the President’s actions were motivated by a desire to punish critical coverage rather than protect legitimate interests. They pointed to continued restrictions on CNN’s participation in press pool arrangements, including travel coverage aboard Air Force One, as evidence of ongoing retaliation.

>Judge Kelly has scheduled a hearing for Thursday to consider the outlets’ motion for a preliminary injunction. During his review of the temporary restraining order, he determined that the White House failed to provide adequate due process before revoking the journalists’ credentials.

>While the Justice Department has cited formal correspondence sent to the affected outlets as proof of due process, those communications were not transmitted until September 22—four days after the initial ban was implemented. Additionally, Judge Kelly noted in his prior ruling that several of the articles cited as problematic by the administration did not involve sensitive national security matters, raising questions about the true motivations behind the credential revocations.

>The administration’s letters to the outlets referenced both national security concerns and allegations of publishing false information, creating ambiguity about whether all the cited material actually posed genuine security risks or was simply unfavorable coverage in the President’s view.

Source link