A federal judge ruled that the White House’s ban on CNN, MS Now, and Politico likely violated constitutional due process, but the outlets were denied access to cover a state dinner for Chinese President Xi Jinping.
The decision, issued overnight, ordered the immediate restoration of press passes and a halt to the ban for 14 days. Yet, just hours later, reporters from the three outlets were once again turned away from the White House grounds, this time while attempting to cover the arrival of Chinese President Xi Jinping for a state dinner.
Judge’s Ruling and White House Pushback
Judge Timothy Kelly’s ruling cited adequate due process concerns, stating the administration had failed to justify the ban on national security grounds. Judge Timothy Kelly pointed out that there is insufficient factual evidence to support the defendants’ argument that the termination of the plaintiffs’ hard passes would genuinely safeguard national security. The judge also noted the White House’s failure to specify any single infraction by the outlets, calling Trump’s rationale cumulative stories over the last two years.
The White House responded with a defiant statement on X, asserting that contrary to what the Fake News wants you to believe, they don’t just get to have free rein into every part of the White House, every event, and every press call. This rhetoric mirrored Trump’s earlier accusations that the banned outlets spread fiction or lies, a claim the White House later reiterated in court filings citing threats to national security from their coverage.
State Dinner Access Denied Despite Court Order
Despite the judge’s ruling, CNN and MS Now reporters were blocked from covering the Xi Jinping state dinner. A CNN producer and a MS Now reporter were told they could not enter the White House grounds, with staff directing them to contact the communications director. The outlets claimed they had submitted proper credentials for the event, but were restricted to only photojournalists and audio technicians rather than full reporting teams.
The incident underscored the chaos surrounding the ban. On September 24, the three outlets had briefly regained access to the White House grounds, with the White House Communications Office stating that press passes and confiscated badges had been restored by 09:45 local time. However, the restrictions resurfaced as the state dinner approached, limiting TV coverage of the event.
Outlets Vow to Challenge the Ban
The dispute has reignited debates over press freedom, with groups like PEN America criticizing Trump’s hostility toward the press and urging clarity on First Amendment protections. PEN America stated that the White House should not be permitted to determine which journalists can cover the president based on the content of their reporting.
Historical Context and Precedents
This is not the first time a presidential administration has clashed with the press. In 2009, the Obama administration attempted to exclude Fox News from a press pool interview, but relented after objections from other networks.
The legal battle also raises questions about the limits of executive power. The Justice Department had previously argued that the outlets’ coverage—such as reports on missile stockpiles and White House construction—posed threats to national security. However, no specific evidence was provided to substantiate these claims, leaving the ban’s justification in question.
The 14-day suspension of the ban, as ordered by Judge Kelly, provides a temporary reprieve, but the underlying conflict remains unresolved.
For now, the White House’s actions continue to test the boundaries of constitutional rights. As CNN’s statement emphasized, the White House is owned by the American people, with decisions made within it supported by taxpayer funds.