(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Justice is defending President Donald Trump’s decision to ban CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, pushing for a broad expansion of the president’s ability to determine which reporters and outlets can access the White House.
Responding to a lawsuit challenging the bans, the Trump administration argued that the decision was not only justified based on national security concerns, but also that the landmark case that affirmed journalists’ access to the White House should be overturned.
“After all, access to the White House is a privilege — not a right,” wrote DOJ senior counsel Michael Velchik.
Citing a ruling last year that allowed the Trump administration to bar The Associated Press from spaces like the Oval Office, the DOJ argued that the same logic should apply to the entire White House complex. They argue that the president should be able to “consider journalists’ viewpoints” when broadly determining access to the White House.
“In short, there is no principled way of easily distinguishing between rooms that are a nonpublic forum and those that are no forum at all — particularly where the White House is not obligated to respond to any questions by reporters in the first place,” the filing said.
The three outlets filed on Monday a First Amendment lawsuit to restore their access, which was revoked by Trump. Journalists for the outlets were turned away from the White House over the weekend.
In a joint statement issued on Monday, the three news outlets said the lawsuit aimed to “protect our First Amendment rights and defend the principle that the government does not decide what the press reports or publishes.”
“Without notice or process, the White House revoked our journalists’ credentials because it objected to our reporting,” the statement said. “Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism free from government interference.”
Trump said in a social media post later on Monday that the barring of journalists was not “an assault on the Free Press” but instead “an assault on the FAKE NEWS,” which he claimed was a national security “threat.”
The DOJ in its court filing also sought to push back on the outlets’ due process claims by providing the court with letters that lay out reasons their access was “preliminarily revoked” and giving the news outlets until Friday to contest the decisions.
Citing specific stories from each outlet, the letters claimed the news organizations violated “standards of professionalism and decorum” by “trafficking in verifiable falsehoods about national security and other issues, and publishing sensitive or classified information.”
Among the stories cited by the White House were reports on depleted munitions, negotiations to end the Iran war, security related to the East Wing renovation, and a Politico story that used “unnamed sources to paint the Republican midterm convention in Dallas as a disaster.”
“Publication of sensitive security information, and misinformation about national security information, diverts White House resources and those of the national security team in particular, which must evaluate whether the leaked information is classified, the source of any leak, and the security implications of any such disclosure. The spread of misinformation, especially relating to national security, is a threat that undermines the President’s ability to safeguard the national security,” the letters said.
According to the court filings, the letters from the White House Press Office were sent on Tuesday — four days after Trump announced his decision on social media — and gave each outlet until Friday to contest the decision. The letters were also unsigned and not on official letterhead.
The DOJ also argued that Trump’s actions were not retaliatory because the “President has not revoked access to other outlets that have equally criticized the President.”
At the same time, the filing argued that some presidents historically have been able to decide which reporters can cover them based on political concerns. The Trump administration argued that George Washington picked reporters to cover his farewell address “based on political considerations,” Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt rewarded sympathetic reporters, John F. Kennedy sought to “court star correspondents,” and Lyndon B. Johnson “tried to use personal interviews as a means of reward and punishment.”
“The White House is the official residence of the President. Significantly, Presidents have long decided which journalists should receive privileged access, which has varied substantially by administration,” the filing said.
Notably, the Trump administration argued that the landmark case of Sherrill v. Knight, from 1977, “is wrong and should be overruled.” The ruling from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals established that credentials to enter or to cover the White House can only be stripped with “notice, opportunity to be heard, and a final written statement of the basis of denial.”
“Defendants, however, argue this precedent is wrongly decided and should be overruled because there is no such due process or First Amendment right attaching to these credentials,” the DOJ argued.
Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.