UPDATED: CNN, Politico and MS NOW are suing Donald Trump and other White House officials after the president banned him from the complex.
In the lawsuit, the news outlets are asking a federal judge to immediately restore their access, which was denied on Saturday, a day after Trump announced he was restricting them from entry to the White House grounds.
“This ban could not be a more direct assault on the First Amendment nor a more blatant violation of our most fundamental constitutional principles.”
The new organizations said in a joint statement, “This morning, we notified the government that we are filing a lawsuit today to protect our First Amendment rights and defend the principle that the government does not decide what the press reports or publishes.
“Without notice or process, the White House revoked our journalists’ credentials because it objected to our reporting. Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism free from government interference.”
The White House also removed CNN from the White House pool on Monday, the day it was scheduled to be the primary network for their coverage. As a result, there will be no TV pool on a day when Trump is traveling to New York, signaling that other networks declined to serve as replacements because of the president’s targeting of CNN.
The news outlets state in their lawsuit, “The President banned CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, and the individual reporters covering the news for those media organizations, in disregard of the most basic guarantees of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause. He did so expressly for the improper purpose of retaliating against Plaintiffs for past news coverage because he deemed it ‘negative’ and chilling future reporting about him and his administration’s policies and actions.
“President Trump has said in no uncertain terms that he would prefer only to be covered by news organizations and reporters who praise his administration. But the Constitution does not allow a president or any other government official to deprive the press of their First Amendment rights and liberty and property interests with no notice or process based solely on his dislike of the content of their reporting. The ban is unconstitutional and should be immediately restrained.”
The lawsuit claims violation of the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause and First Amendment retaliation and viewpoint discrimination. The outlets are seeking a temporary restraining order and injunction to prohibit the ban from being enforced and to require that their access be restored, as well as a declaratory ruling.
The outlets are represented from Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., who represented CNN’s Jim Acosta when his credentials were revoked in Trump’s first term, as well as others at Gibson Dunn, including Katie Townsend and Patrick Fuster.
In addition to the impact of the ban on their own news organizations, the outlets argue in the lawsuit that
it “inflicts an injury on all news media organizations—who now risk a similar fate if they engage in reporting the President deems insufficiently favorable. And the public at large suffers for however long the unconstitutional ban restricts access to current and complete information about their government. These irreparable harms should not be tolerated for a day longer. The Court should immediately enjoin enforcement of the ban.”
The lawsuit also names White House Communications Director Steven Cheung, Secret Service Director Sean Curran and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles as defendants.
Shortly after the lawsuit was announced, Trump posted on Truth Social, “The White House is not instituting an assault on the Free Press, something which I cherish. It is instituting an assault on the FAKE NEWS, something that has grown like Cancer in our beloved United States of America. It is corrupt, purposeful, pervasive, fully coordinated, and totally out of control. It is a threat to our National Security, and must be stopped, NOW! Thank you for your attention to this matter.”
In 2018, in the case of Acosta, a federal judge ruled that precedent required that the White House give proper notice of a revocation. In the 1977 D.C. Circuit opinion, Sherrill vs. Knight, the judges ruled that “the protection afforded newsgathering under the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of the press requires that this access not be denied arbitrarily or for less than compelling reasons.”
The White House has yet to provide a legal justification for revoking the credentials of the news outlets. On ABC’s This Week on Sunday, host Jon Karl pressed House Majority Leader Steve Scalise on Trump’s ban.
“Do you support him banning these news organizations because he doesn’t like what they are reporting?” Karl asked.
Scalise deflected, pointing to Trump’s accessibility to the media and claimed that Joe Biden removed the press credentials from more than 400 news organizations.
In fact, the Biden White House established new criteria for credentialing, based in part on how often holders had used the hard passes and that they had full time employment and residency in the D.C. area. It was not based on a news organization’s viewpoint, although the changes were made after one correspondent had repeatedly interrupted press briefings.
Karl told Scalise that they “were not banned from the White House.” He then asked Scalise whether Trump’s ban violates the First Amendment, but Scalise again did not answer. Karl moved on to another topic.
Leave a Reply