Judge questions Trump's ban of three prominent news outlets from White House

A federal judge in Washington voiced skepticism Wednesday about the Trump administration's justification for barring CNN, Politico and MS NOW from White House grounds, though he did not rule immediately after an emergency hearing. U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, said he was bound by precedent from earlier First Amendment fights over press access, including a case that reached the Supreme Court, which required that journalists get a chance to be heard before losing access. "I think it is fair to say that the processes that the court laid out wasn't followed here," Kelly said, adding he would rule as soon as possible, according to PBS NewsHour.

The outlets argue President Donald Trump targeted them over their coverage, amounting to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination; their attorney, Theodore Boutrous Jr., called the ban an "unprecedented, unreasonable punishment" lacking due process. Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik countered that White House access is "a privilege, not a right" and said Trump acted to protect national security. In a Tuesday filing, the administration cited letters sent to each outlet listing reporting it called false or sensitive, including CNN's coverage of East Wing bunker construction, MS NOW's reporting on an alleged leak investigation, and Politico's publication of ballroom security funding details.

The five-network White House press pool, which includes CNN, suspended coverage of Trump events in solidarity, and other news organizations filed a brief urging the court to immediately restore the three outlets' access.

Summarized by PolitiKool from PBS NewsHour’s reporting. Read the full story at PBS NewsHour →