Can Trump legally ban media outlets from the White House? DOJ Says Yes — Here’s What Happens Next | Today’s news
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) urged a federal judge not to block President Donald Trump’s decision to ban three White House news outlets, arguing that “access to the White House is a privilege, not a right,” CNBC reports.
In a court filing late Tuesday, the Justice Department reportedly said Trump’s decision to ban MS NOW, CNN and Politico was driven by national security concerns.
The filing came ahead of a teleconference hearing Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, where Judge Timothy Kelly is scheduled to hear arguments from attorneys representing the three branches.
They asked a court to block the ban as part of a lawsuit filed against Trump and his administration on Monday.
“The president has determined that the prosecutors reported classified or sensitive information related to national security,” the Justice Department said, according to CNBC.
“Therefore, the President has a compelling interest in limiting access to White House grounds to organizations that do not pose such a risk to national security,” the statement said.
Trump announced the ban on Truth Social on Friday, accusing CNN, MS NOW and Politico of reporting what he described as “FAKE NEWS.”
He said the decision was in response to what he called repeated publications of “FICTION and LIES” regarding the US president, his administration and the country.
Trump also hinted that other media organizations may face similar restrictions.
What is the media arguing about?
CNN, MS NOW and Politico filed a lawsuit Monday in federal court in Washington, DC, claiming the ban was unlawful retaliation for constitutionally protected speech, according to Reuters.
The stores also claimed the administration violated their due process rights.
“This ban could not be a more direct attack on the First Amendment, or a more flagrant violation of our most basic constitutional principles,” the organizations said.
Can the White House decide who gets media access?
The dispute raises a broader constitutional question about the government’s authority to control access to the White House while allowing journalists from other organizations to provide information about the president.
Experts on the First Amendment and the White House Correspondents’ Association have called the decision to reject accredited reporters unconstitutional, according to Reuters.
Legal expert Lucy Dalglish, quoted by Reuters, also pointed out an important difference: “The government may have discretion in the first place whether to grant access to the media, but once it opens up the space to the press, it cannot necessarily limit access based on a journalist’s point of view or the content of their reporting.”
“They don’t have to let anyone in, but once they do, they can’t decide who gets in based on point of view or content,” Dalglish said.
According to the dossier, Trump determined that the three sources reported classified or sensitive national security information.
Read also | Trump says CNN, MS NOW, Politico could return to WH if court rules against ban
What did the White House say?
The White House defended the decision, arguing that the news organizations affected could continue to report outside the White House.
She said the outlets are able to cover administration without requiring access to the Oval Office.
“Fake news has no place demanding a seat in the President’s Oval Office. The lies it smears are a disservice to the American public and are tearing at the very fabric of our democracy,” the White House said in a statement.
what’s next
Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, is scheduled to hear arguments Wednesday on a request by affected media houses to block the ban.
The case pits the national security rationale against the stores’ First Amendment claims.
