CNN, MS NOW and Politico ask judge to stop Trump from reviving White House ban

Oliver Contreras/AFP/Getty Images

News organizations that were targeted by President Donald Trump’s attempt to ban them from the White House asked a federal judge late Monday to extend his order temporarily restoring their access, describing the ban as an “unlawful assault on the most fundamental First Amendment freedoms.”

The new filing, submitted by attorneys for CNN, MS NOW and Politico, said that actions the administration has taken to “retaliate” against the news organizations, even after the judge ordered the White House to allow them inside, only underscore that the “motive is to punish and chill journalism they dislike.”

US District Judge Tim Kelly last week issued a temporary restraining order requiring that the White House reactivate the press badges for journalists at the three outlets, after the badges had been turned off earlier this month, preventing the journalists’ from entering the White House grounds.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images/File

White House bars CNN from covering Trump on behalf of major TV networks as he travels to Tennessee

Kelly initially rejected White House claims that national security concerns motivated Trump’s move to ban the outlets. However, the judge – who was appointed by Trump during his first term – signaled he’d consider additional evidence explaining that supposed justification.

But the outlets argued even as the administration has tried to push the national security reasoning in court, Trump and other officials have said the ban is about punishing negative coverage.

“President Trump has continued to justify the ban on the ground that he dislikes Plaintiffs’ coverage of him and his administration without even mentioning national security,” the organizations said.

The outlets also pointed to a Sunday press appearance by Attorney General Todd Blanche as well, in which he described the national security risk as being the result of “one-sided media coverage” from certain outlets.

“The real reason Defendants imposed the ban – expressed contemporaneously and repeatedly since then – is that the President dislikes Plaintiffs’ supposedly ‘negative’ reporting,” the outlets said.

Kelly’s order restored the outlets’ access to the White House for two weeks, and on Thursday, press badges that had been confiscated by the administration under the ban were returned and turned back on.

However, the administration refused to allow CNN to join Trump on Air Force One – during his trip to Tennessee on Saturday – as the TV pool member assigned to travel with him that day. (The White House pool is a smaller group of news organizations that cover, on a rotating basis, presidential events and movements that cannot accommodate the entire White House press corps.)

The new filing from the new organizations referenced the pool episode Saturday to argue that the “White House has persisted in unpredictably and inconsistently” implemented the ban.

“The White House’s words and actions leave little doubt that it will immediately reinstitute a complete ban of CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO if allowed the opportunity,” the media companies said.

Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

America’s courts keep defending the First Amendment as Trump tries to silence critics

Kelly, in his TRO ruling, said that legal precedent made clear that outlets were entitled to advance notice that they could be banned and be given an opportunity to challenge the determination, making the White House’s failure to do so a likely violation of the Constitution’s due process clause. In addition to the due process claims, the new organizations are challenging the ban on First Amendment grounds.

The judge’s order expires on October 8, and the outlets are asking for a preliminary injunction, which would maintain their access while the lawsuit plays out in Washington DC’s federal court. A preliminary injunction would also set the stage for a Trump appeal to revive the press prohibitions.

The new organizations also encouraged Kelly to adopt a broader legal rationale for keeping Trump’s ban on hold, as they emphasized the alleged First Amendment violations in addition to the due process claims they have brought.

“Because no amount of manufactured process could ever allow a ‘ban on the free press’ under the First Amendment, entering a preliminary injunction on First Amendment grounds prevents further ‘shenanigans,’ as Plaintiffs’ counsel warned at the hearing on the temporary restraining order,” they wrote.

When Trump announced on September 18 that he was banning the news organizations, he said he was doing so because of “their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!”

WH Releases Another Taxpayer-Funded Pro-Trump Ad | The Arena with Kasie Hunt | CNN Audio

The White House has since pointed to stories published by the outlets about the Iran war, the East Wing ballroom construction and even the GOP’s midterm convention to claim that their coverage had “threatened national security and/or spread falsehoods.”

Letters from the White House highlighting those reports gave the outlets until 5 p.m. ET Friday to object to the policy, before Trump made a “final” decision to ban them. The Justice Department claimed the letters and the process they outlined were enough to overcome due process concerns — an argument Kelly rejected in his ruling last week that said the administration had failed to convince him this was an “extraordinary” circumstance.

The Trump administration has until Friday to respond to Monday’s filing, and the outlets will submit final written brief by next Monday. Kelly said he’ll schedule a hearing and that he plans to rule “expeditiously.”

Oliver Contreras/AFP/Getty Images

周一晚些时候，一些新闻机构因唐纳德·特朗普总统试图禁止他们进入白宫而受到攻击，他们请求联邦法官延长其暂时恢复他们进入白宫的命令，并将该禁令描述为“对最基本的宪法第一修正案自由的非法攻击”。

CNN、MS NOW 和 Politico 的律师提交的新文件称，即使在法官命令白宫允许这些新闻机构进入之后，政府仍然采取“报复”行动，这只会凸显出“其动机是惩罚和打压他们不喜欢的媒体”。

美国地区法官蒂姆·凯利上周发布了一项临时限制令，要求白宫重新激活这三家媒体记者的记者证。此前，这些记者证在本月初被关闭，导致记者无法进入白宫。

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images/文件

白宫禁止CNN代表各大电视网报道特朗普前往田纳西州的行程。

凯利法官最初驳斥了白宫关于特朗普出于国家安全考虑而禁止这些媒体的说法。然而，这位由特朗普在其第一任期内任命的法官表示，他会考虑提供更多证据来解释这一所谓的理由。

但媒体方面辩称，尽管政府试图在法庭上以国家安全为由推行禁令，但特朗普和其他官员表示，这项禁令是为了惩罚负面报道。

这些组织表示：“特朗普总统一直以他不喜欢原告对他及其政府的报道为由，为这项禁令辩护，却只字未提国家安全问题。”

这些媒体还指出，司法部长托德·布兰奇在周日的新闻发布会上表示，国家安全风险是某些媒体“片面报道”造成的。

这些媒体表示：“被告实施禁令的真正原因——此后他们反复强调——是总统不喜欢原告所谓的‘负面’报道。”

凯利的命令恢复了媒体进入白宫的权限，为期两周。周四，此前因禁令而被政府没收的记者证被归还并重新启用。

然而，尽管CNN是当天被指派随行的电视媒体记者团成员，但白宫拒绝让其搭乘空军一号前往田纳西州。（白宫记者团是由几家新闻机构组成的较小团体，他们轮流报道总统的活动和行程，这些活动和行程无法容纳整个白宫记者团。）

这些新组织提交的新文件中提到了周六的泳池事件，认为“白宫一直以不可预测和不一致的方式”执行禁令。

这些媒体公司表示：“白宫的言行清楚地表明，如果有机会，它将立即恢复对 CNN、MS NOW 和 POLITICO 的全面禁令。”

Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

特朗普试图压制批评声音，而美国法院则继续捍卫宪法第一修正案。

凯利法官在其临时限制令裁决中指出，法律先例明确规定，媒体机构有权提前获知其可能被禁播，并有机会对该决定提出质疑，因此白宫未能这样做很可能违反了宪法的正当程序条款。除了正当程序方面的诉求外，这些新成立的组织还以第一修正案为由对禁令提出质疑。

法官的命令将于10月8日到期，这些媒体正在申请初步禁令，以便在华盛顿特区联邦法院审理此案期间维持他们的采访权限。初步禁令的生效也将为特朗普提起上诉、恢复新闻禁令铺平道路。

这些新成立的组织还鼓励凯利采取更广泛的法律理由来维持特朗普的禁令，因为他们强调了除了他们提出的正当程序主张之外，还存在所谓的违反第一修正案的行为。

他们写道：“因为根据第一修正案，任何人为制造的程序都不可能允许‘禁止新闻自由’，所以根据第一修正案的理由发布初步禁令可以防止进一步的‘诡计’，正如原告律师在临时限制令听证会上警告的那样。”

9月18日，特朗普宣布禁止这些新闻机构，他说这样做是因为“他们不断‘报道’假新闻！”

白宫发布另一则由纳税人资助的支持特朗普的广告 | 卡西·亨特主持的《竞技场》节目 | CNN音频

此后，白宫指出这些媒体发表的有关伊朗战争、东翼宴会厅建设，甚至共和党中期选举大会的报道，声称他们的报道“威胁了国家安全和/或散布了谎言”。

白宫致函相关媒体，强调了这些报道的重要性，并给予他们时间在美东时间周五下午5点前对该政策提出异议，之后特朗普才做出最终决定禁止这些媒体报道。司法部声称，这些信函及其概述的程序足以消除对正当程序的担忧——但凯利法官在上周的裁决中驳回了这一论点，称政府未能说服他这是一个“特殊”情况。

特朗普政府需在周五前对周一提交的文件作出回应，而各媒体则需在下周一前提交最终书面陈述。凯利表示，他将安排听证会，并计划“尽快”作出裁决。