CNN, MS NOW and Politico Sue Trump Administration After White House Ban

WASHINGTON — CNN, MS NOW and Politico filed a federal lawsuit Monday against President Donald Trump and his administration after reporters for the three news organizations were barred from the White House, escalating a dispute over press access into a First Amendment court battle. 

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The organizations are seeking emergency relief restoring their journalists’ access to the White House and preventing the administration from excluding them based on their coverage. 

“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,” the organizations said in a joint statement.

The outlets said the White House revoked their journalists’ credentials “without notice or process” because it objected to their reporting, arguing that allowing the action to stand would threaten press freedom and independent journalism. 

CNN reporter Betsy Klein, MS NOW correspondent Akayla Gardner and Politico reporter Cheyenne Haslett were denied entry to the White House over the weekend. Their credentials were disabled, and the reporters were turned away after Trump announced Friday that he was barring the organizations over coverage he characterized as “fake news.” 

The lawsuit argues that the administration acted in retaliation for coverage Trump considered negative and describes the ban as an assault on First Amendment protections. Those assertions are allegations made by the plaintiffs; the court has not yet ruled on whether the administration’s actions were unconstitutional. 

Trump defended the decision Monday. In a Truth Social post, he said the White House was not attacking the free press but instead targeting what he calls “FAKE NEWS.” He further characterized the targeted media as corrupt and a national-security threat. Reuters reported that Trump provided no evidence supporting the national-security assertion. 

The Associated Press and the White House Correspondents’ Association are among those that have criticized the restrictions and called for the journalists’ access to be restored. 

Commentary surrounding the lawsuit

The announcement has also generated sharply worded political commentary from supporters of the lawsuit. The original commentary provided to Pulse celebrated the legal action with “HELL YES!” and predicted that the case would end in “humiliation for MAGA.”

The writer argued that Trump has “no legal leg to stand on,” characterized his administration as failed, described his agenda as fascist and called him “the most anti-First Amendment President in American history.” The commentary further predicted that Trump would ultimately be “hammered” by constitutional protections.

Those statements are the author’s opinions and predictions, rather than findings made by the federal court. The lawsuit itself, however, makes similarly forceful constitutional allegations: the plaintiffs contend that the administration retaliated against them because of their reporting and violated First Amendment and due-process protections. 

The case could move quickly. The news organizations have requested emergency intervention, and hearings could begin as soon as this week. 

Pulse Radio 96.1 | The Beat of Lake County