Just in: Judge Skeptical of Trump's White House Ban on CNN, Politico and MS NOW, But Doesn't Restore Access Yet

Judge Skeptical of Trump's White House Ban on CNN, Politico and MS NOW, But Doesn't Restore Access Yet



A federal judge signaled Wednesday that he has doubts about President Trump's ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico from White House grounds, but he has not yet ordered access restored. The hearing is the latest clash in an increasingly tense relationship between the president and the press.

What happened in court

Judge Timothy Kelly of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said the outlets were not given due process before their access was cut off. Kelly, who was appointed by Trump, said near the start of the afternoon hearing that due process wasn't followed here.

He heard arguments from attorneys for the news outlets and the Justice Department. Kelly did not rule from the bench on whether to restore access and kept the ban in place while he weighs both sides.

How the dispute began

Trump announced last week that the three outlets were banned from the White House for their reporting, and their hard press badges were revoked. All three filed suit on Monday and asked for a temporary restraining order that would immediately restore their employees' access to the White House complex.

The outlets' argument

The outlets' lawyer argued that the ban amounts to viewpoint discrimination that violates the First Amendment, and that the decision came completely out of the blue. Their lawsuit says the Constitution protects the interests that news organizations and White House reporters have in their credentials and the access those credentials provide.

The government's argument

The Justice Department says the president has the right to decide who gets privileged access to certain spaces. DOJ attorney Michael Velchik said access to the White House is a privilege, not a right, and cited national security concerns as the reason for the current restrictions. In court filings, the department points to a 2025 appeals court decision that allowed the administration to temporarily bar the Associated Press from the Oval Office and Air Force One.

Kelly seemed skeptical of the administration's arguments involving the outlets' coverage of the Iran war and ballroom construction.

Why a "win" for the White House may be temporary

Reporting on the hearing split on how to read it. Some outlets framed Kelly's decision not to rule immediately as a small win for Trump, since the ban stays in place. Others focused on the judge's skeptical questions. Both readings can be true: a temporary restraining order is a high bar, and a judge can hesitate to grant one while still doubting the government's case.

The AP dispute earlier in 2025 shows how this can go. In that case, a judge initially declined to restore access immediately, then later ruled that the ban violated the First Amendment. An appeals court later allowed the administration to temporarily bar the AP from certain spaces, so the outcome of that fight was mixed. The current case may not follow the same path.

What to watch next

  • Kelly's ruling on the request for a temporary restraining order.
  • Whether the case moves to a preliminary injunction, which would involve a fuller hearing.
  • Any appeal, which could reach the D.C. Circuit quickly.
  • Reaction from other outlets and press groups, which supported the AP in 2025.

Key takeaways

  • Judge Kelly said the outlets were denied due process, but hasn't yet restored access.
  • The White House argues that access is a privilege and cites national security.
  • The outlets argue the ban is viewpoint discrimination that violates the First Amendment.
  • The ban remains in effect while the judge decides.

Sources: reporting from CBS News, The Hill and Just The News. This is a developing story, so check for updates.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Just in: Better Deal': Why Trump Just Rejected Iran's Truce Offer

Image
  'Better Deal': Why Trump Just Rejected Iran's Truce Offer Iran put a new proposal on the table to end the ongoing war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Trump said no. Here's what's behind that decision, and why both sides may actually be getting something out of the standoff. What Trump said Speaking to reporters on Saturday, Trump rejected the Iranian proposal outright, arguing that Iran's willingness to negotiate is itself a sign of weakness, since Tehran is "losing so badly." At the same time, he insisted he's open to making a deal, just not the one Iran put forward. The offer on the table Iran's latest proposal closely resembles the memorandum of understanding the two countries had signed back in June. That earlier agreement fell apart last month over disagreements on the deal's terms, which triggered an escalation in attacks, especially around the Strait of Hormuz — a critical oil-shipping chokepoint that remains effectively blo...
Read more

Trump Signs Greenland Security Deal, Expanding U.S. Military Access to the Arctic

Image
Trump Signs Greenland Security Deal, Expanding U.S. Military Access to the Arctic President Trump signed a new security agreement with Denmark and Greenland on Tuesday, September 22, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. The deal grants the United States wide-ranging powers to secure and defend the Arctic island, which remains Danish territory. What the deal does The agreement reaffirms Greenland's sovereignty as part of the Kingdom of Denmark, but gives the U.S. broad access to the island's airspace and territory. It allows the U.S. to expand the existing Pituffik Space Base, the northernmost American military installation, which serves as an early-warning system for incoming missiles. Beyond expanding Pituffik, the amended deal lets the U.S. establish two new bases and leaves the door open for additional defense areas. The accord calls for wide U.S. military mobility on Greenland's territory, including undersea access, on the basis that...
Read more

Xi Jinping's Historic White House Visit: What Happened and Why It Matters

Image
  Xi Jinping's Historic White House Visit: What Happened and Why It Matters Chinese President Xi Jinping just wrapped up his first trip to Washington in more than a decade, and it was a first in another sense too: it marks the first time a Chinese leader has made two separate formal state visits to the United States. Here's a rundown of the visit and what came out of it. The visit, day by day Xi's plane landed at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on September 23, kicking off a fast-moving three-day stop. Thursday brought the formal pageantry, a full state arrival ceremony at the White House followed by a state dinner that evening. Xi traveled with his wife, Peng Liyuan. The visit closed out Friday with a quieter, more personal note. President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump hosted Xi and Peng for tea in the White House's Red Room before the group traveled together to the National Archives, where they viewed historical records documenting the long arc of U.S.-China ...
Read more