|

Update: After news organizations threatened to return to court to compel the White House to adhere to a recent judicial order to restore and honor their press passes, all three companies have reported that their journalists have been allowed to return to the building’s grounds. The original article appears below:

A federal judge has ruled that media outlets suing the Trump administration over its attempt to ban them from White House grounds are likely to prevail in their arguments, and has issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the ban while the case proceeds.

But while that early morning TRO was meant to take effect immediately, several reporters from the news agencies targeted by the ban — CNN, MS NOW, and Politico — said they were still being blocked from entering the White House hours later.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, ordered a 14-day TRO on the president’s ban, which was announced in a Truth Social post last Friday.

Lawyers for the Department of Justice (DOJ) had argued in defense of Trump’s ban, claiming that access to the White House was a “privilege” and citing concern for “national security” to justify barring the news outlets from the grounds.

The DOJ echoed Trump’s claim in his Truth Social post that the outlets’ reporting on the administration was “FAKE NEWS.” Notably, Trump has a long history of describing news coverage he dislikes as “fake,” even when the reporting is factual.

The DOJ cited specific examples of news articles they felt were problematic, in some cases citing the use of anonymous sources — but, as observers online noted, the sources for those stories were sometimes public record. Indeed, in one article cited by the Justice Department, the story’s source turned out to be Vice President JD Vance.

The use of anonymous sources is a regular journalistic practice, one that Trump himself has utilized when it served his needs.

Kelly recognized this point in his order, writing that the practices the DOJ complained about “are routine” for media.

The judge — who has ruled against Trump’s attempts to restrict press freedoms in the past — noted that, while media companies had a “high bar” in arguing against restrictions based on national security, it appeared they had adequately demonstrated that their due process and free press rights were being violated.

“None of Defendants’ arguments convince the Court that Plaintiffs are not likely to succeed on their due process claim,” Kelly wrote in his order.

Kelly was also skeptical of the DOJ’s arguments about national security, suggesting they were a red herring in order to uphold the ban.

The judge wrote that he was “skeptical…that Defendants’ interest in safeguarding national security is the actual motivation for, or is even advanced by, the revocation” of the outlets’ press passes. He added:

The record lacks factual support for Defendants’ contention that the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes will in fact protect national security or that national security will be endangered if the Court orders their passes reinstated while this litigation proceeds.

Ted Boutrous, an attorney representing the news outlets in the case, praised the issuance of a TRO to block Trump’s media ban.

“This is a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law. We greatly appreciate the court’s swift action,” Boutrous said.

Freedom of the Press Foundation Chief of Advocacy Seth Stern hailed the ruling, and said more should be done to curtail the use of “national security” in DOJ defenses of Trump administration policies.

“It’s long past time for judges to start aggressively sanctioning DOJ lawyers when they make frivolous national security arguments to turn Trump’s petty grievances against the press into government policy. That way, we won’t get to the point where Secret Service agents are defying court orders to carry out the president’s authoritarian whims,” Stern said in a statement.

But despite the ruling going into effect right away, several journalists who work for the companies targeted by Trump’s ban reported that they were still being turned away from the White House hours later.

“We went to a U.S. Secret Service checkpoint just across the street from here around 6:10 this morning, and I gave them my driver’s license, as well as my press ID. They put it through the system and said that I was not approved for entry,” said CNN’s Betsy Klein, reporting her situation on the network itself.

Klein noted that some of her team, including a producer, were allowed in, but that other members, including photojournalists for CNN, were not allowed through the checkpoints. MS NOW and Politico indicated that their journalists were also being denied access as of Thursday morning.

The news agencies requested an emergency judicial hearing to address the ongoing ban.

It’s unclear what will happen next. The Trump administration may choose to appeal the decision to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which the president previously indicated he would do if a ruling was issued against him. However, in a similar case involving the White House’s revocation of CNN’s Jim Acosta’s press pass in 2018, the Trump administration relented, fully restoring his pass without litigating the matter further.