A judge on Wednesday began weighing an emergency reinstatement of three media outlets ejected from the White House by President Trump.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly was asked to issue a temporary restraining order against Mr. Trump’s ban of Politico, CNN and MS Now, pending additional court arguments in the case. He said he would rule on the matter “as soon as I can.”
The judge heard from the media outlets’ lawyer, Theodore “Ted” Boutrous Jr., who argued the sudden ban was illegitimate, retaliatory, violated the First Amendment and deprived the organizations of their right to due process.
“Here the constitutional violation is against the public interest,” Mr. Boutrous said. He called Mr. Trump’s ban “clearly a retaliatory case” meant to chill reporting on his administration that he finds objectionable.
Justice Department Senior Counsel Michael Velchik argued that the press have no constitutional right to the non-public areas of the White House and their access can be restricted, even for viewpoint-discrimination reasons. He said the ban, however, is the result of stories they published or aired that contained leaked information that violates national security.
Mr. Velchik opposed emergency reinstatement of the reporters, arguing it would infringe on the separation of powers and create a national security concern if the president is forced to allow the offending reporters to close access to the president while he’s meeting at the White House this week with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
The Trump administration on Tuesday sent letters to the three outlets, detailing the stories they say were a threat to national security and setting a Sept. 25 date for the outlets to respond.
“If they have points to raise, they can do so to the president who will consider anything. But I didn’t even hear them objecting to those points here today,” Mr. Velchik argued.
The ban has escalated into a battle with the larger media and has left the White House and president without official coverage from the television and still photographer pool designated to record and distribute photos to networks and affiliates. Dozens of news outlets filed a court brief Wednesday in support of the banned outlets.
The main media outlets responsible for pool coverage have boycotted covering Mr. Trump in solidarity with the banned outlets.
The president said he banned the three organizations because they produced “fake news” and overwhelmingly negative coverage of his administration. The Justice Department argued in court that the journalists did not have a right to White House access and produced stories that included leaked information that posed a threat to national security.
Mr. Boutrous contested the national security argument, noting that Mr. Trump’s initial social media post announcing the ban “didn’t say anything about national security,” but only complained generally about the coverage.
Judge Kelly was appointed by Mr. Trump but has previously ruled against the president.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.