Journalists Return to White House After Legal Battle Over Press Access
Updated September 24, 2026 at 12:53 PM EDT
Sign up for alerts on breaking news and exclusive reporting from NPR
Journalists from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico have resumed their work at the White House after a brief ban imposed by President Trump, who accused these outlets of deliberately publishing negative news. The ban was lifted following a court order.
A midnight ruling by U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly, based in Washington, D.C., granted a temporary restraining order for 14 days in favor of the news organizations, whose White House press credentials were revoked the previous Saturday.
Despite the ruling, reporters from the affected outlets were initially denied access on Thursday morning. In response, they sought an immediate court hearing, prompting Judge Kelly to set a deadline of 12:30 PM ET for the administration’s response. Micah Stopperich, White House press operations director, stated that restoration of access began at 7:10 AM and was completed in under three hours.
The lawsuit, initiated on Monday by CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, argued that the revocation of press credentials violated their constitutional rights. They requested a temporary restraining order to allow continued reporting from the White House during ongoing legal proceedings.
Judge Kelly, appointed by Trump, noted that the news outlets were “likely to succeed in showing that their hard passes were revoked without constitutionally adequate due process,” emphasizing that individuals should be given “notice and an opportunity to be heard before the Government deprives them” of a constitutionally protected interest.
Judge Signals Likely Restoration of Press Access
During an emergency hearing on Wednesday, Judge Kelly suggested that the White House’s actions potentially breached the constitutional due process rights of journalists with permanent credentials. Theodore J. Boutrous, representing the media outlets, described the ban as retaliation, deeming it “probably the clearest case in history” of viewpoint discrimination.
Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik countered that White House access is a “privilege,” not a right, citing national security concerns as a justification for the ban. The department included letters from the White House to the news organizations, criticizing their coverage on issues like the construction of a “top secret” bunker and discussions with Iran.
Boutrous dismissed these claims, arguing that national security concerns were only raised days after the ban was implemented. “I guess the light bulb went off and they all decided ‘Start talking about national security,'” he remarked.
Court Skeptical of Security Claims in Press Ban
In the Thursday ruling, Judge Kelly expressed skepticism over the administration’s national security justification for revoking press credentials, questioning whether it was the true motivation. The Department of Justice had accused the barred outlets of “trafficking in verifiable falsehoods” and publishing sensitive information.
Judge Kelly found no evidence linking the identified reporting to national security threats and noted that the reporters involved did not hold hard passes. He criticized the vague standards cited by the White House for the credential revocations.
Kelly dismissed the urgency claimed by the government, pointing out that some of the stories in question dated back months or years. “The sorts of stories Defendants identify in the letters to Plaintiffs are routine,” he stated.
Copyright 2026 NPR
—
Read More Michigan News
