A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on Thursday requiring the Trump administration to restore White House press credentials to three news organizations that had their access revoked days earlier. U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly granted the 14-day order for CNN, MS NOW, and Politico after the outlets filed a joint lawsuit challenging the ban on constitutional grounds.
The three organizations had their press credentials revoked on Saturday. President Trump stated the action was not tied to specific reporting but rather stemmed from what he characterized as an accumulation of unfair and negative coverage over an extended period. The Department of Justice subsequently argued in court filings that the outlets were barred due to national security concerns and claims of false reporting.
In his ruling, Judge Kelly, a Trump appointee nominated in 2017, found that the news organizations were likely to succeed in demonstrating their credentials were revoked without adequate due process protections. He noted that constitutional precedent requires individuals receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before the government deprives them of protected interests. Kelly expressed skepticism about the government’s national security justifications, observing that such concerns were raised only after the ban was implemented.
During an emergency Wednesday hearing, attorneys for the news outlets characterized the action as viewpoint discrimination and retaliation for coverage, arguing it violated First Amendment protections. Justice Department lawyers countered that White House access constitutes a privilege rather than a right. However, Kelly concluded the government provided no evidence demonstrating how the identified reporting damaged national security and noted that reporters who authored several disputed stories did not hold permanent credentials.
The judge also found the government failed to establish clear, formal standards for credential revocation prior to the action and dismissed the examples cited as standards too vague to meet due process requirements. Kelly ruled that nothing in the record justified deviating from constitutional protections based on claimed urgency, as some of the disputed stories dated back months or years.
Article Attribution | Read More at Article Source
Article summary produced by Claude AI