On Wednesday, the three organizations filed suit before Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump‑appointed federal judge, seeking an order that would return the White House credentials stripped from their reporters after President Trump announced the bans on Friday.
The plaintiffs allege that the president’s action violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of a free press and the Fifth Amendment’s due‑process protections, characterizing the ban as “viewpoint discrimination” intended to punish reporting they deem negative.
Trump told reporters on Friday that he was “fed up” after what he called two years of unfair and negative coverage, adding on his Truth Social platform that “fake news people and publications that only write negatively… shouldn’t be allowed access to the most important office anywhere in the world.”
The case echoes a 2018 ruling by the same judge, who ruled in favor of CNN correspondent Jim Acosta after Trump aides removed his permanent White House credentials, finding the removal unlawful.
Attorney Theodore J. Boutrous of Gibson Dunn, representing the outlets, said the president’s explicit statement that the ban is meant to intimidate journalists underscores a clear constitutional violation and harms the American public’s right to rigorous, fact‑based coverage.
The lawsuit also references a 1977 U.S. Court of Appeals decision that requires the Secret Service to provide a clear, due‑process explanation before denying a permanent press pass, and cites a parallel suit by the Associated Press after it was barred from the White House last year.
A ruling against the president could reaffirm that White House press credentials are a privilege that cannot be withdrawn solely because of unfavorable coverage, thereby limiting the administration’s ability to control the news narrative.
The hearing occurs as Trump travels to the United Nations, where he has already dismissed questions from journalists, and as the White House has attempted to sidestep the traditional press pool with its own “Trump TV” YouTube stream.