Federal Judge Denies AP’s Request for Full White House Access: What This Means for Press Freedoms

A federal judge recently refused to temporarily reinstate the Associated Press’ access to President Trump’s events, including the Oval Office and Air Force One.

The judge, Trevor McFadden, denied the AP’s request after Trump banned the organization from these areas. This ban followed the AP’s decision to keep using the name “Gulf of Mexico,” despite Trump’s preference for “Gulf of America.”

While McFadden turned down the emergency request, he set a hearing for March 20 to discuss a more permanent solution. McFadden, appointed by Trump in 2017, gave several reasons for his decision. He stated that the AP hadn’t shown they were experiencing “irreparable harm” from the ban. He pointed out that the AP could still receive information from the White House Correspondents’ Association’s pool notes, even without direct access to events.

The judge also noted delays in the AP’s lawsuit as evidence that they weren’t suffering harm that needed urgent action. Yet, he questioned the legality of the ban, calling it “discriminatory” and “problematic.” While he acknowledged the White House’s practice of having a press pool, he expressed concern about the organization’s reliance on a private group for coverage.

In response, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the decision, saying access to the President is a privilege for journalists, not a legal right. An AP spokesperson emphasized the importance of press freedom, stating they look forward to the upcoming hearing to fight for their rights.

The AP has filed a lawsuit against key White House officials, claiming the ban violates the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause. During the hearing, the AP’s attorney argued that the White House was trying to enforce “official government vocabulary” by limiting the organization’s access.

The attorney added that the ban’s scope had widened, now appearing as a total restriction on AP’s access to White House press events. They argued this was unfair and that the AP was being singled out for using a stylebook that differs from the government’s narrative.

The Justice Department, representing the White House, contended that the ban did not hinder the AP’s reporting capabilities. They compared the AP’s current access to that of other news organizations. One attorney suggested that the president has the authority to choose who to speak with.

However, the judge did not fully agree with this viewpoint. He argued that being part of the press pool allows journalists to witness significant historical moments. The Justice Department’s efforts received criticism from some Democrats who felt that they were misusing their powers to protect Trump’s interests.

Major news outlets have expressed their support for the AP, including some traditionally aligned with Trump. They issued a joint letter urging the administration to lift the ban. Despite changing their terminology for other places, the AP plans to continue using “Gulf of Mexico,” citing its global significance as recognized by many countries.

The White House Correspondents’ Association also backed the AP, warning that the ban threatens the integrity of the press covering the presidency. This is not the first time a White House has restricted press access—previous administrations have faced similar legal challenges.

Source link