President Donald Trump faces a new legal challenge over his White House crackdown on the press. The lawsuit is filed on behalf of ordinary Americans who say his restrictions on the press have made them unable to do their jobs.
The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and Yale Law School’s Media Freedom & Information Access Clinic filed the suit on Monday in federal court in New York on behalf of six plaintiffs, including a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and a political journalist who rely on White House reporting in their work.
The lawsuit argues that the White House’s decision is denying the public independent information on Trump and his administration.
The six plaintiffs are a historian, a high school teacher, two journalists, a human rights advocate and a university student. They argue they need unbiased reporting from the White House due to their jobs.
Beverly Gage, who won the Pulitzer, wrote in a statement: “As a historian who studies government, politics, national security, and civil liberties, I know that independent journalism is essential for understanding what our government does.” She also said the “real losers” in the case are Americans who are being denied information about the government.
The case, Roth v. Trump, challenges a policy that allows the administration to restrict or revoke journalists’ access based on Trump’s claims that their coverage is “fake” or “false.”
Lawyers contend that the White House facilities are made available to the press under the First Amendment and that the administration cannot exclude any media organization simply because it doesn’t like the views they express.
“The White House cannot decide what information Americans receive by punishing critical reporting,” said Katie Fallow, deputy litigation director at the Knight Institute.
Trump is named as a defendant, and the complaint seeks not only to restore reporters’ credentials but also to get the court to prevent retaliation against the White House press corps, regardless of which media organization a journalist represents.
The complaint follows Trump’s September 18 decision to bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from White House facilities after accusing them of publishing false information and negative coverage.
In that case, the White House lawyers argued in court that it was a matter of national security, but a federal judge in Washington issued a preliminary injunction on October 13, ordering the White House to maintain those outlets’ access while their case proceeds.
The administration has faced separate legal challenges from The Associated Press over White House press access and The New York Times over restrictions on journalists at the Pentagon.
Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch and one of the plaintiffs, warned that government pressure on journalists can have repercussions that extend well beyond the newsroom.
“The defense of media freedom and access is an essential safeguard of democracy,” Roth said.
Another plaintiff, Peter Schmidt-Nowara, a civics teacher in New York City, said the restrictions adversely affect his students’ ability to learn about their government.
The court must now decide the issue as the administration faces a request for protections that go well beyond those already sought by media outlets.