AI-Debiased Article
Rewritten from cbsnews.com 2 min read
4 Wire-neutral provisional

✓ No loaded language, vague sourcing, or framing detected.

Judge Questions Legality of Trump's Ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House

A federal judge raised concerns about President Trump's ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House grounds, questioning the due process followed in revoking their access. The judge referenced past court cases that support the right to due process for journalists. The Justice Department defended the ban, citing national security, while the news outlets argued that the revocation lacked proper justification.

People
Judge Timothy Kelly Ted Boutrous Michael Velchik President Trump

A federal judge expressed skepticism regarding President Trump's ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House grounds during a hearing on Wednesday. Judge Timothy Kelly of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia stated that the news outlets were not afforded due process before their access was revoked. The ban was announced by Trump last week, leading the three outlets to file a lawsuit on Monday seeking a temporary restraining order to restore their access.

In the hearing, Judge Kelly referenced two precedent cases from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: Karem v. Trump (2022) and Sherrill v. Knight (1977), which established that the Fifth Amendment's right to due process applies when the White House revokes a journalist's access. Kelly remarked, "I think it is fair to say that the process laid out in those two cases wasn't followed here."

Ahead of the hearing, the Justice Department submitted letters to the three outlets stating that their access was revoked due to alleged violations of professionalism and decorum, including publishing false information and sensitive material. The press office provided the outlets until Friday at 5 p.m. to respond to the revocation.

Judge Kelly questioned the timing of the letters, suggesting that informing the outlets of conduct standards after their credentials were revoked did not constitute due process. Attorney Ted Boutrous, representing the news outlets, argued that the letters did not align with President Trump's statements and failed to meet due process or First Amendment standards. Boutrous criticized the government's claim of national security concerns as a post hoc justification for the ban.

In contrast, Justice Department lawyer Michael Velchik contended that access to the White House is a privilege, not a right, and defended the president's ability to act swiftly for national security. He noted that Trump often criticizes media outlets, including those that still retain access.

The hearing concluded without an immediate ruling, but Judge Kelly indicated he would decide as soon as possible. The ban has affected CNN's participation in the White House television pool, which includes CBS News, ABC News, NBC News, and Fox News. CNN's removal from a trip with Trump to the United Nations General Assembly prompted the other networks to suspend the television pool in solidarity. Consequently, major networks are not covering Trump's activities during Chinese President Xi Jinping's visit to Washington, D.C.

Annotating as

No note attached

on this article.

Original vs. Neutral

Original Headline

Judge skeptical of Trump's White House ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico

Neutral Headline

Judge Questions Legality of Trump's Ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from White House