, MS NOW and Politico sued Trump on Monday in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., asking a federal judge to immediately restore access for their reporters after the White House banned them last week. The filing turns a fight over press credentials into a direct challenge to whether the White House can cut off specific outlets because it dislikes their coverage.
The case arrived after Trump announced the ban on Friday afternoon in a Truth Social post, then said an hour later at an Oval Office event that he was sick of the outlets’ “cumulative stories over the last few years.” He also said the move was “a result of their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!” and called the coverage “corrupt, purposeful, pervasive, fully coordinated, and totally out of control.”
In a joint statement, the three news organizations said they were filing the lawsuit to protect their First Amendment rights and argued that the White House revoked their journalists’ credentials without notice or process. They say the government cannot punish reporters for coverage it dislikes, and they point to a 1977 ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals saying the White House cannot arbitrarily deny a journalist a press pass without due process.
The White House answered on Monday afternoon that access for journalists is “a privilege — not a right,” and said the First Amendment protects the right to publish but does not guarantee a hard pass, briefing room seat or place in the press pool. That clash goes to the center of the case: whether the government can control access as a matter of discretion, or whether it must justify taking it away from specific reporters because of what they write.
Politico reported that ABC, CBS, NBC and are declining to participate in White House pool duties moving forward in response to the ban, widening the practical impact beyond the three outlets that filed suit. The complaint also says Trump has said he would prefer to be covered only by news organizations and reporters who praise his administration. What the court does next will shape whether the ban stays in place while the case moves forward, or whether the reporters are back inside while the legal fight unfolds.
