Washington – The Department of Justice has filed a robust defense of President Donald Trump’s recent decision to revoke White House press credentials for CNN, MS NOW and Politico. In a filing that underscores the administration’s commitment to protecting national security, DOJ senior counsel Michael Velchik wrote that access to the White House is a privilege, not a constitutional right.
National‑security concerns drive the ban
The filing argues that the three outlets have repeatedly published what the administration calls “verifiable falsehoods” about sensitive security matters, including reports on depleted munitions, ongoing negotiations to end the Iran conflict, and details of the East Wing renovation. By disseminating such information, the outlets allegedly divert the resources of the President’s security team, forcing them to assess whether leaked material is classified and to mitigate potential threats.
According to the DOJ brief, the letters sent to the outlets cite specific stories that allegedly violated standards of professionalism and decorum. One example is a Politico piece that, using unnamed sources, portrayed the Republican midterm convention in Dallas as a disaster. The administration contends that such reporting not only misleads the public but also endangers the nation’s security apparatus.
Legal precedent and historical context
The filing challenges the 1977 Supreme Court precedent set in Sherrill v. Knight, which requires notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a written statement before credentials can be revoked. The DOJ argues that the case is “wrong and should be overruled,” asserting that no due‑process right attaches to White House press credentials.
To bolster its position, the administration points to historical examples: George Washington selected reporters for his farewell address based on political considerations; Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt rewarded sympathetic journalists; John F. Kennedy courted star correspondents; and Lyndon B. Johnson used personal interviews as a means of reward and punishment. The filing concludes that presidents have long exercised discretion over who receives privileged access.
Administration’s response to criticism
President Trump responded on social media, emphasizing that the action targets “FAKE NEWS” rather than a free press. He framed the move as a necessary defense against misinformation that threatens national security, not an assault on legitimate journalism.
The DOJ also noted that the President has not revoked credentials from outlets that have been equally critical, suggesting the decision is not retaliatory but based on concrete violations of security protocols.
Outlets’ lawsuit and First Amendment claims
CNN, MS NOW and Politico filed a First Amendment lawsuit seeking to restore their credentials, arguing that the revocation infringes on press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism. In a joint statement, the outlets warned that unchecked government control over press access could set a dangerous precedent.
While the lawsuit underscores the tension between press freedom and national security, the Trump administration maintains that safeguarding the nation must take precedence. The DOJ’s filing places the President’s authority to manage White House access at the forefront of the legal debate, inviting the courts to reconsider longstanding precedents in light of today’s security challenges.
Original reporting: Allentown News – 6abc Philadelphia — read the source article.
