A federal judge on Tuesday granted a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from enforcing a ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico journalists at the White House, finding the media outlets are likely to succeed on claims that the move violated their due process rights and First Amendment protections. In a 26-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Timothy J.
Kelly—appointed by President Donald Trump in 2017—ruled Tuesday that the outlets were likely to prevail on claims that the revocation of their White House credentials violated the Fifth Amendment's due process clause and constituted unlawful First Amendment retaliation and viewpoint discrimination. Kelly ordered administration officials, except Trump, not to "execute, implement, or enforce" the September 18 decision revoking White House hard-pass credentials for employees of CNN, MS NOW and Politico while the case proceeds. Newsweek reached out to the White House for comment.
The judge said the record supports the conclusion that Trump likely banned the organizations because he viewed their coverage as inaccurate and biased against him. "Freed from such a naiveté, it is not hard to conclude that President Trump likely banned Plaintiffs from the White House because he believes that their reporting is generally inaccurate and biased against him," Kelly wrote. The court rejected the administration's argument that the credential revocations were justified by national security concerns, finding there was "practically nothing national security-related in the record connected to the President's decision." Kelly also determined the outlets successfully demonstrated a likelihood of irreparable harm, writing that the loss of constitutional freedoms "for even minimal periods of time" constitutes irreparable injury.
Trump announced on September 18 that he was "banning" CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, citing what he described as years of "fake news" coverage. The following day, reporters from the three organizations who held White House hard passes were denied entry to the complex after their credentials were deactivated. The outlets and several journalists sued, arguing the ban violated their Fifth Amendment due process rights and constituted retaliation and viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment.
Kelly previously granted a temporary restraining order restoring access for the organizations. In Tuesday's opinion, he said longstanding D.C. Circuit precedent establishes that White House hard-pass holders have protected constitutional interests in those credentials and cannot be stripped of them without adequate due process.
The judge also pointed repeatedly to Trump's own public statements explaining the ban, including comments that the organizations "purposely write negative news" and his suggestion that he would "love it" if they "could straighten themselves out." "Simply put, that is unlawful viewpoint discrimination," Kelly wrote. The Department of Justice had argued that White House access is "a privilege—not a right," that "there is no such due process or First Amendment right attaching to these credentials," and that the president should have greater discretion over press access. It also insisted Trump’s actions were justified because the outlets failed its "minimum requirements of professionalism" and published sensitive national security information.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
