• A federal judge has temporarily ordered the Trump administration to restore White House credentials to MS NOW (CMCSA), CNN (WBD), and Politico.
  • The ruling is a 14-day temporary restraining order, not a final decision, so the broader constitutional dispute over press access remains active.
  • The administration has argued that press access is a privilege, not a right, and has urged the court to overturn a key precedent.

A federal judge late on September 23 granted a temporary restraining order requiring the Trump administration to restore White House hard-pass credentials to journalists from MS NOW, CNN, and Politico, according to court documents. The order, issued by U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly, directs relevant defendants and their agents—excluding President Trump personally—to reinstate access that was revoked around September 18. The relief lasts 14 days, pending further proceedings.

The dispute began on September 18, when President Trump announced that the three outlets would be barred from the White House, criticizing what he called their cumulative “fake news” coverage. The following day, MS NOW correspondent Akayla Gardner and reporters from CNN and Politico were denied entry; credentials were disabled or confiscated. Gardner reported that a security officer said the decision was “above him.”

The three outlets filed a joint federal lawsuit on September 21, alleging violations of the First and Fifth Amendments and seeking immediate restoration of access. In their complaint, they argued that the ban was retaliatory and lacked due process. The Justice Department has defended the restriction as a matter of White House discretion and national security, arguing that access is a “privilege—not a right.” It also urged the court to overturn or narrow Sherrill v. Knight, a 1977 D.C. Circuit decision that held once the government makes White House press facilities available, it cannot deny access arbitrarily or based on protected expression; it must provide notice, an opportunity to respond, and a written explanation for denial.

The ruling is a significant, if preliminary, victory for the news organizations. “We are pleased the court recognized the irreparable harm our clients would suffer without access,” a lawyer for the outlets said in a statement. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The case is being closely watched in media and legal circles because it tests the boundaries of executive power over press credentials. While the direct economic impact is limited, a prolonged exclusion could affect the outlets’ ability to report live from the White House, interview officials, and compete for breaking-news coverage. Other networks reportedly curtailed shared coverage of the president in protest, an exceptional move that signals concern beyond the three targeted organizations.

The administration’s posture is unusually consequential because DOJ has explicitly asked the court to reject Sherrill’s protections. If courts accepted that view, the executive branch would gain substantially broader latitude to revoke or deny White House credentials. The next legal stages are likely to examine the record supporting the ban, whether the outlets received due process, and whether the policy constituted viewpoint-based retaliation.

For now, the journalists can return to the White House, but the broader fight over press access is far from over. The temporary restraining order expires after 14 days unless extended by the court.