Judge Will Not Yet Rule on WH Stripping Media Outlets of Credentials

A federal judge said Wednesday he will not yet rule on whether the White House can strip media outlets of credentials despite expressing skepticism with the cited precedent.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly said that he will rule on the case “as soon as I can” after saying that President Trump stripping credentials from Politico, CNN, and MS NOW violated legal precedent that journalists should have advance notice of required rules. Per POLITICO:

The Trump-appointed judge said during an emergency hearing sought by the media organizations that the legal precedent “wasn’t followed here.”

Kelly’s decision to refrain from an immediate ruling means Trump’s ban will remain in force for now, leaving 78 journalists at the three outlets who previously held credentials without access to the White House complex.

All three media outlets have called for a temporary restraining order on the policy, alleging that it violates the First Amendment. The Department of Justice argued that the president can “control reporters’ access to restricted presidential areas, such as the Oval Office.”

“Access to the White House is a privilege — not a right,” it said.

In a letter to CNN, the White House Press Office also accused the network of “trafficking in verifiable falsehoods about national security and other issues, and publishing sensitive or classified information.”

Theodore Boutrous Jr., an attorney representing the news organizations, urged Judge Kelly to issue the ruling as soon as possible to ensure that the outlets can cover Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the White House.

“They’re using national security as a talisman, a magic word,” Boutrous said. “This is just pretextual, post-hoc effort to justify just a blatant violation of due process.”

Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik argued that ruling against the policy during Xi’s visit would represent a national security threat, asking that the judge wait to rule until the weekend.

“I think there would be serious separation of powers concerns as well as national security concerns [if the court acts] during that period,” the DOJ attorney said.