An injunction protects their White House entry credentials, but the outlets are asking the court to end their exclusion from smaller groups covering the president.
CNN, MS NOW and Politico have amended their lawsuit against US President Donald Trump to challenge their continued exclusion from press-pool duties in the Oval Office and aboard Air Force One. Deadline said on October 28 that the restrictions remain in place even though other journalists are admitted.
The challenge follows an injunction earlier in October protecting the hard passes—credentials allowing entry to the White House grounds—of dozens of reporters at the three outlets. Trump’s grounds ban prompted their initial lawsuit. Judge Timothy Kelly issued a temporary restraining order and then a preliminary injunction, finding that the ban likely violated the outlets’ due-process and First Amendment rights.
Kelly, a judge on the US District Court for the District of Columbia, was appointed by Trump in 2017.
Press-pool assignments give smaller groups of reporters access to presidential question sessions in the Oval Office or travel with the president aboard Air Force One. The three outlets remain excluded from those assignments despite regaining access to the grounds.
Theodore Boutrous Jr., the outlets’ lead attorney, said the exclusions aim to punish and discourage unfavorable coverage and make it harder to report important events for the public. The plaintiffs cited the frequency of Trump’s press encounters in the two settings:
The first National Security Strategy in two decades commits to deeper European cooperation as Canada and the European Union discuss closer ties.
2 min
| Location | Press events |
|---|
| Air Force One | 121 |
| Oval Office | 138 |
The plaintiffs allege that the continuing exclusions discriminate against their viewpoints, retaliate against reporting protected by the First Amendment’s press-freedom guarantee, and violate due process, which requires fair government procedures.
They describe the restrictions as an unstated policy carrying out Trump’s directive to take his ban “as far as you can.” They also cite his statement, made hours after the initial lawsuit was filed, that publications writing only negatively should not have access to the Oval Office.
Their argument treats these press settings as “nonpublic forums”: government-controlled spaces with limited access where, they argue, officials cannot select journalists according to their viewpoints. The outlets do not seek unrestricted entry. They argue that once the White House admits selected journalists for reporting, it cannot exclude them because it dislikes their coverage.
An unnamed White House official said no journalist has a constitutional right to enter the Oval Office, Air Force One or other sensitive, private facilities. The official accused publications of lying, fabricating and ignoring the truth, and said they could write from outside those secure facilities.
A related access dispute remains under appeal. In 2025, a federal judge ruled for the Associated Press after the White House restricted its access because it retained the name Gulf of Mexico rather than adopting Gulf of America. A D.C. Circuit appeals panel subsequently allowed the White House to continue excluding the agency from locations including the Oval Office during the appeal, even for content-based reasons. That permission is interim, not a final decision on the case.
The new pool-access claims await a ruling, while the administration appeals Kelly’s preliminary injunction protecting the three outlets’ access to the grounds.
Ukraine’s ombudsman plans food and medical aid for about 2,000 people in the Russian-occupied city on October 30, with mine clearance still under way.
3 min
The change applies across pension schemes from 28 October 2026. Where the member died before 75 and had enough remaining allowance, delays beyond two years no longer make lump sums taxable.
4 min
