The White House argued in a court filing on Tuesday that President Trump was within his rights to expel CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House grounds, telling the court that "access to the White House is a privilege, not a right" and that the move does not violate the First Amendment. The filing said Trump had determined the three outlets had breached standards of "professionalism and decorum" expected of journalists covering the administration, citing what it described as a pattern of "trafficking in verifiable falsehoods about national security and other issues, and publishing sensitive or classified information."
The dispute began last Friday, when Trump announced on Truth Social, the platform he owns, that he would ban the three outlets, saying they "shouldn't be able to constantly write or report fiction and lies." By Saturday morning, journalists from all three organisations had been denied entry to the White House grounds and had their press passes confiscated. The outlets sued by Monday morning, arguing that the ban "brazenly discriminates based on editorial viewpoint" and that they had received no advance warning before losing access.
Specific stories cited as violations
The government's filing on Tuesday night included letters sent earlier that day to each of the three outlets, setting out specific stories the White House says either spread falsehoods or endangered national security. CNN was cited over a January 2026 story alleging it disclosed "top secret" construction details relating to the East Wing bunker. MS NOW was singled out for a June 2026 report citing a source who said Trump had "underestimated the willingness of Iran to resume conflict." Politico, for its part, was accused of publishing a document detailing funding for the White House ballroom that included specific descriptions of planned Secret Service security investments. None of the three outlets had commented on the filing at the time of writing.
A hearing before a Trump-appointed judge
US District Judge Timothy J. Kelly, who was nominated to the bench by Trump in 2017, is due to hold an emergency hearing on Wednesday to consider the outlets' request for a temporary order reversing the ban. The White House's filing disputes the outlets' claim that they were denied due process, arguing instead that it has provided "sufficient post-deprivation process."
The case echoes one from Trump's first term. In 2018, Kelly ruled against Trump after he expelled CNN reporter Jim Acosta from the White House, ordering Acosta's credentials restored on the grounds that he had not been given adequate notice to contest the decision. Trump referenced that precedent last week, writing on Truth Social that, given Kelly's earlier ruling in the Acosta case, the administration would "almost without question" need to appeal whatever the judge decides this time.
Other outlets respond with solidarity
The ban has drawn responses from across the US media landscape. The so-called White House press pool, the consortium of five television networks, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, Fox News and CNN, that shares responsibility for close-range coverage of the president, suspended its immersive coverage of Trump in response. Several other news organisations temporarily withheld publication of photographs from the president's events as a further gesture of solidarity with the banned outlets.
Source: The New York Times
