WASHINGTON - A US federal judge extended access to the White House for CNN, MS NOW and Politico journalists, deciding on Oct 13 that President Donald Trump likely broke the law when he tried to ban them, in the latest ruling against him in the press freedom dispute.
US district Judge Timothy Kelly issued a written decision that elaborated on his Sept 24 emergency order that reinstated access for the journalists.
The news organisations and press freedom groups have accused Trump of unconstitutional retaliation against journalists for coverage he does not like.
Kelly’s order in September gave the CNN, MS NOW and Politico journalists access to the White House grounds on a temporary basis.
The judge issued a ruling called a preliminary injunction on Oct 13 that will remain in effect until he makes a final judgment in the lawsuit brought by the news organisations, unless an appeals court lifts his order.
Kelly wrote that Trump’s public remarks made clear that he banned the news outlets because he considered their reporting biased and inaccurate, and not because of national security concerns as government lawyers later asserted in court.
“Simply put, that is unlawful viewpoint discrimination,” the judge wrote, adding that “no one should read this decision as suggesting that President Trump’s complaints are meritless.”
Trump appointed Kelly in 2017 during his first presidential term.
Past presidents have battled with the press, but Trump’s campaign against the media has been unprecedented.
He has upended decades of tradition by denying basic access to many major news organisations, launching personal attacks on journalists for their reporting and elevating media outlets seen as more sympathetic to the administration.
He also has filed lawsuits against multiple news outlets.
Trump announced the ban in September on his social media platform, saying CNN, Politico, and MS NOW “shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President of the United States.”
The Justice Department has emphasised Trump’s contention that the ban is legally justified on national security grounds.
The outlets have said the revocation of their White House passes was unlawful retaliation for their news coverage and accused the Trump administration of manufacturing meritless national security concerns to justify the ban.
The outlets said in a lawsuit that the ban violated the US Constitution’s First Amendment protections for freedom of speech and a free press, as well as their rights to due process, meaning fair treatment from the government.
The White House on Sept 24 reinstated the CNN, MS NOW and Politico journalists after Kelly decided the ban “likely violated their constitutional due process rights,” and ordered their access immediately restored.
‘Coerce better coverage’
The judge held a hearing on Oct 8 to hear arguments by the news outlets and the Justice Department over whether to extend the protection for the journalists against being barred from the White House.
The Justice Department defended the bans as fair and justified.
“Here we have the unusual situation where the president himself has said he wants to chill speech. He wants to coerce better coverage,” Theodore Boutrous, an attorney for the outlets, told Kelly during the hearing.
“CNN, MS NOW and Politico engaged in apparently indefensible conduct,” Justice Department lawyer Michael Velchik said.
The legal battle is being waged just weeks before the Nov 3 US midterm elections in which Trump’s fellow Republicans are fighting to retain control of Congress.
Trump’s job approval ratings are at record lows in opinion polls amid concerns over issues such as inflation and the Iran war. REUTERS