White House defies court order, doesn't reinstate access for banned reporters
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
A news camera sits outside the White House on Sept. 23. Photo: Alex Wroblewski / AFP via Getty Images
Reporters for MS NOW, CNN and Politico were denied access to the White House on Thursday, despite a court order issued earlier that morning mandating that the Trump administration reinstate their badges.
Why it matters: The legal case isn't over. Defying the order could weaken the White House's position as it continues to litigate the ban in court.
- The administration "would be potentially subject to contempt of court and it hurts their credibility with the court even more," said attorney and legal analyst Shan Wu.
State of play: The banned outlets filed a request for an immediate hearing this morning after their reporters were turned away.
- The outlets noted "time is of the essence" as CNN is set to be the television pool for President Xi Jinping's visit to the White House on Thursday evening.
- Judge Timothy Kelly ordered the Trump administration to respond to the non-compliance allegations by 12:30pm ET.
- The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Zoom in: Press freedom advocates are calling on the government to hold the White House in contempt.
- "... Court orders are just paper unless they're enforced. Enough is enough. Government officials who continue to deny journalists' access to the White House in defiance of Kelly's order should be held in contempt," said Freedom of the Press Foundation chief of advocacy Seth Stern.
Catch up quick: Kelly ruled the Trump administration violated the Fifth Amendment rights of CNN, MS NOW and Politico by banning them, and granted the plaintiffs a temporary restraining order that forces the White House to immediately reinstate their press access for 14 days.
- In a court filing, Kelly, a Trump appointee, said the plaintiffs "have shown a likelihood of success, at least on their Fifth Amendment procedural due process claim."
- In their complaint, the outlets argued the White House violated their First Amendment rights by blocking them in retaliation for their reporting and discriminating against their viewpoint; and their Fifth Amendment rights for banning them without due process.
What's next: Kelly will continue to gather evidence and oversee the case for the next two weeks.
- He could extend the temporary restraining order to maintain the outlets' access while the case is litigated.
What to watch: The White House indicated before Kelly's decision that it would appeal the ruling, but it can't legally appeal the ruling for the next two weeks.
- If the case moves forward after that, the White House could seek an appeal. Kelly's decision doesn't address the plaintiff's First Amendment claims. Those are likely to be further litigated.
Disclosure: The author of this article is a paid contributor for CNN.
Editor's note: This story was updated to include commentary from Shan Wu.
