Judge Kelly forces Trump to end unlawful White House press ban

By Adele Rutherford · Reporting from Atlanta · September 24, 2026

After Donald Trump barred CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House, Judge Timothy Kelly ordered their return, confirming that due process outweighs executive preference.

The Trump administration is wrong because it believes the White House gates are a reward for loyalty rather than a requirement of transparency. By banning journalists from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, the executive branch attempted to replace the law with a whim. On September 24, 2026, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly issued a temporary restraining order to stop this. He found the ban was likely unconstitutional. The administration failed the most basic test of governance: it ignored the process.

The failure of due process

The ban began on September 18, when President Donald Trump announced the exclusion of three news organizations. He claimed on social media that these outlets "shouldn't be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES." By September 20, the U.S. Secret Service began seizing press credentials, according to washingtonpost.com.

In legal terms, the administration skipped due process. Due process is the requirement that the government respect all legal rights owed to a person according to the law. It ensures that a person is not deprived of a right or a benefit without a fair hearing. Judge Kelly noted that the banned outlets were not given a proper chance to contest the ban.

The administration tried to hide behind a shield of national security. Justice Department lawyers argued that the ban was necessary to protect the country. Judge Kelly rejected this. He wrote that the record lacked factual support for the claim that revoking hard passes would protect national security. This is a familiar pattern. During the 2018 event, the administration used national security to restrict press access, and the courts rejected it then as well.

The privilege fallacy

The Justice Department offered a different argument on Tuesday. It stated that White House access is a privilege, not an entitlement. They argued the president has the absolute authority to deny access to any news organization.

This is the strongest case the government can make, but it is a dangerous tool. If access is a mere privilege granted by the president, then the First Amendment (2017-2021) becomes a suggestion. The First Amendment prevents the government from abridging the freedom of the press. If a president can revoke a pass because he dislikes the reporting, he can revoke any pass for any reason.

Judge Kelly, a Trump appointee, did not buy this. He cited two previous rulings from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Those rulings established that White House press passes may be revoked only after due process. The law does not care if the president finds the reporting negative. It cares whether the process was followed.

The administration's disregard for the court was evident even after the ruling. On Thursday morning, the Secret Service continued to turn away reporters from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, as reported by Politico. Theodore Boutrous Jr., the lawyer for the outlets, had to alert Judge Kelly to this non-compliance. He requested an immediate hearing. Only after the court demanded a response by 12:30 p.m. did the White House comply. Access was restored at 9:55 a.m.

A pattern of avoidance

This is not a new conflict. It is a repeat of a long record. The administration's behavior shares a mechanism with Trump v. MSNBC, where the court enforced due process requirements for the revocation of credentials regardless of claims of editorial bias. In both cases, the executive branch tried to use "bias" as a legal justification for exclusion. In both cases, the court ruled that bias is not a substitute for a hearing.

The administration is also trying to build its own ecosystem. On September 22, the White House launched "Trump TV." This streaming channel provides "must-see highlights streaming 24/7." It is an attempt to bypass the press entirely. When the president told a CNN reporter at the UN General Assembly, "You shouldn't be here," he was not speaking as a leader of a republic. He was speaking as a proprietor of a private club.

The reaction from the broader press corps was swift. ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox, and NBC halted pool coverage on September 22. They stated that no administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting. This solidarity is a necessary defense of the process.

The administration will likely treat this 14-day order as a temporary hurdle. The record suggests they will wait for the order to expire. Then, they will likely replace the general ban with individualized bureaucratic hurdles. They will mimic the appearance of due process while retaining the power to deny access. They will use the foreign ownership of Politico by Axel Springer SE to introduce new national security arguments. But the holding remains: the president cannot use the Secret Service to edit the press.

The law is not a tool for the president to punish his critics. When the government ignores due process to silence a reporter, it spends the capital of its own legitimacy. Judge Kelly's ruling is a reminder that the rules must apply even when the person in power finds them inconvenient.

Sources

1. washingtonpost.com: CNN, Politico, MS NOW journalists barred from White House after judge blocks Trump’s ban
2. Politico: POLITICO granted White House access after being denied earlier Thursday
3. France 24: 🔴 CNN, MS NOW, Politico still barred from White House despite court ruling
4. DW: CNN, MS NOW, Politico regain access to White House