TRO Issued Ordering Reinstatement of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico White House Access

Read the original at Reason ↗
Cite

Volokh, E. (2026, September 24). TRO Issued Ordering Reinstatement of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico White House Access. Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/24/tro-issued-ordering-reinstatement-of-cnn-ms-now-and-politico-white-house-access/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Reason · collected 2026-09-24 · by Eugene Volokh

Quick Summary

Judge Timothy Kelly issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on September 18, 2026, requiring President Trump and several White House officials to reinstate press credentials for CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO. The news organizations had their hard passes deactivated following an announcement by the president that they were banned from the White House. Judge Kelly's decision was based on precedent set by the D.C. Circuit Court, which established that reporters have a constitutional right to due process before losing access to the White House.
Written by AI on 2026-09-24, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

On September 18, 2026, U.S. President Donald Trump announced an immediate ban on several news outlets from entering the White House, including CNN, MS NOW (formerly MSNBC), and Politico. In a social media post on his platform Truth Social, Trump accused these outlets of reporting "fiction and lies" when covering the U.S. government. The decision sparked legal action with CNN, MS NOW, and Politico filing lawsuits arguing their First Amendment rights were violated. A federal court temporarily blocked the ban but it remains contentious, with the Justice Department petitioning for its reinstatement on October 3rd. This move escalates long-standing tensions between Trump and major media outlets, raising significant concerns over freedom of the press in the United States.

Written for “Trump Bans Media Outlets From White House” on 2026-11-04, grounded in this article and the 223 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Trump Bans Media Outlets From White House
Politics · 224 article(s) covering the same event. Compare every outlet's account →

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans left and hedges 22% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
NBC News
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 3 of 33 claims Outlet record 78/100
NBC News
Hedges 3 of 35 claims Outlet record 78/100
NBC News
Hedges 0 of 17 claims Outlet record 78/100
The Guardian
Hedges 0 of 6 claims Outlet record 66/100
Dawn
Hedges 2 of 17 claims Outlet record 72/100
The Straits Times
Hedges 2 of 16 claims Outlet record 66/100
Washington Examiner
⚖️ Leans right further right than this Hedges 8 of 45 claims Outlet record 69/100
South China Morning Post
⚖️ Leans right further right than this Hedges 0 of 2 claims Outlet record 62/100
ABC News (US)
Hedges 1 of 7 claims Outlet record 67/100
Fox News
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 0 of 5 claims Outlet record 68/100
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
45
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
22%
10 of 45 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans left
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
67/100
Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
224
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-24 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 1116 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Eugene Volokh
192 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 In May 2025, Harvard revoked Plaintiff's tenure and terminated her appointment with HBS.
🔮 The requirement would hold DSPs liable for their failure to adhere to state-set publication standards, not only "treat[ing] [them] as … publisher[s] or speaker[s]," but treating them as publishers subject to sweeping state controls.
🔮 From Sanchez v. Almond, decided Wednesday by Judge John McConnell (D.R.I.): Mr. Sanchez began working at the office of Rhode Island Governor Daniel J. McKee in May 2021 as a "constituent services" staffer.
🔮 Beauchamp believed that the post appeared to condone murder based on the victim's political viewpoints and statements and became concerned that this post and perception would reflect on GCAO in the public's eyes and thereby undermine the public's trust in GCAO's official duty to prosecute homicides without bias and without regard to a victim's views, statements, or affiliations.
2026-11-02 · assertive framing · Firing for "Rot in Hell Charlie Kirk" Post Upheld
🔮 After Judge Covington announced that she would be denying McClain's suppression motion, Outlaw stood up and said "the judge is a cocksucker" loud enough for Judge Covington to hear.
🔮 According to the Complaint, in August 2024, Plaintiffs and other District community members learned that then-member of the Board of School Directors of Souderton Area School District (the "Board") William Formica posted lewd comments on social media about Vice President Kamala Harris, disparaging teachers and non-English speakers, and deriding diversity programs.
🔮 Some excerpts from the long First Superseding Indictment in U.S. v. Hakim (E.D. Mich.), filed Oct. 21, alleging conspiracy to transmit threats in interstate commerce as well as, for two defendants, witness intimidation and destruction of property to prevent seizure (8 of the 12 defendants had originally been indicted in May); the targets included UM officials and businesses connected with them, as well as the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Detroit:
🔮 Because "[t]he costs and efforts required to defend a lawsuit through [discovery] could chill free speech nearly as effectively as the absence of the actual malice standard altogether[,]" a public figure plaintiff must plausibly allege actual malice at the outset of the litigation.
🔮 The First Amendment forbids a State from using its investigative power that way, and I will not allow it while this case is pending.
🔮 The same logic could apply to nuns who had felt religious pressure to do the educational or nursing work that their order was known for, or to monks who had felt religious pressure to do agricultural work that supports the monastery.
2026-10-30 · assertive framing · Amicus Brief in OneTaste Criminal Prosecution
Also by Eugene Volokh
Open Thread
2026-11-03 · Reason
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 192 articles by Eugene Volokh →

Topics

Court D.C. Cir. White House the D.C. Circuit the White House

Subjects

Karem PERSON · 3× Trump PERSON · 3× White House ORG · 3× Court ORG · 2× D.C. Cir. ORG · 2× the D.C. Circuit ORG · 2× the White House ORG · 2× CNN, Inc. ORG · 1× Timothy Kelly PERSON · 1× Volokh PERSON · 1×

Narrative

And even the justifications provided to Plaintiffs after this case was filed are ambiguous about the true purpose of the revocations: while Defendants' letters to Plaintiffs mention national security concerns, they purport to identify reporting that "threatened national security and/or spread falsehoods," leaving open the possibility that all the stories fall into the later bucket, rather than the former…. [T]he record [also] lacks factual support for Defendants' contention that the revocation of Plaintiffs' hard passes will in fact protect national security or that national security will be endangered if the Court orders their passes reinstated while this litigation proceeds.
framing: mixed · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-24
🔮 For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant the Motion….

Claims (45 extracted, 10 hedged)

On the afternoon of September 18, 2026, President Trump announced in a social media post that, "effective immediately," he was "banning" the news organizations CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO "from the White House." asserted
he → announce → House
And those news organizations allege that over the weekend their reporters were denied access to the White House and had their "hard pass" press credentials deactivated. asserted
credentials → allege → House
Plaintiffs—the three news organizations and three individual reporters—sue the President and several White House officials and move for a temporary restraining order, asking the Court to order the immediate reinstatement of their hard passes pending further proceedings. asserted
Plaintiffs → sue → proceedings
The Court's resolution of their Motion is dictated by the application of well-known D.C. Circuit precedent that this Court must faithfully apply. asserted
Court → dictate → that
For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant the Motion…. asserted
Court → explain → Motion
Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success, at least on their Fifth Amendment procedural due process claim. uncertain
Plaintiffs → show → claim
The merits of this claim are assessed in two steps: "the first asks whether there exists a liberty or property interest which has been interfered with by the State; the second examines whether the procedures attendant upon that deprivation were constitutionally sufficient." uncertain
procedures → assess → deprivation
Plaintiffs have shown they are likely to succeed at both steps. asserted
they → show → steps
As for the first, the D.C. Circuit held in Sherrill v. Knight (D.C. Cir. 1977) that "the interest of a bona fide Washington correspondent in obtaining a White House press pass … undoubtedly qualifies as [a] liberty [interest] which may not be denied with-out due process of law under the fifth amendment." uncertain
which → hold → amendment
And if there were any doubt about what Sherill meant, the D.C. Circuit more recently reaffirmed this conclusion in Karem v. Trump (D.C. Cir. 2020), holding that "a duly issued hard pass may not be suspended without due process." uncertain
pass → be → process
Plaintiffs are also likely to succeed in showing that their hard passes were revoked without constitutionally adequate due process. asserted
passes → succeed → process
The "general rule" is that "individuals must receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before the Government deprives them" of a constitutionally protected interest. asserted
Government → receive → interest
Indeed, the Supreme Court has "described the root requirement of the Due Process Clause as being that an individual be given an opportunity for a hearing before he is deprived of any significant property interest." asserted
he → describe → interest
Karem also holds that, because of the substantial interests at stake, before the Government can revoke the White House-issued hard pass of a reporter it must promulgate rules or standards governing the conduct that would lead to such revocation. asserted
that → hold → revocation
And the reporter must "receive fair notice not only of the conduct that would subject him to punishment, but also of the magnitude of the sanction that the White House might impose." uncertain
House → receive → that
Defendants do not dispute that Plaintiffs did not receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before their hard passes were revoked. asserted
passes → dispute → notice
And, as in Karem, the record is bereft of any relevant "formally articulated standards" in place before any of the conduct for which Defendants revoked their hard passes. asserted
Defendants → articulate → passes
One standard Defendants appear to offer—reflected in letters they sent to Plaintiffs on September 22, 2026, identifying their objectionable reporting—is so vague it hardly does the trick. asserted
it → appear → trick
See, e.g., ECF No. 16-1 ("[Y]our organization has exhibited behavior in violation of the standards of professionalism and decorum expected of those given access to the White House Complex."). asserted
organization → see → Complex
Moreover, Defendants renewed Plaintiff Betsy Klein's hard pass several months after she published some of the identified reporting, undercutting any argument that she or her employer, for example, had the requisite notice that the conduct at issue violated a relevant standard. asserted
conduct → renew → standard
Finally, nothing put Plaintiffs on notice of the magnitude of the sanction Defendants imposed. asserted
Defendants → put → sanction
None of Defendants' arguments convince the Court that Plaintiffs are not likely to succeed on their due process claim. uncertain
Plaintiffs → convince → claim
Defendants say that Sherrill and Karem were wrongly decided. asserted
Sherrill → say → ?
Maybe—but this Court is bound by D.C. Circuit precedent, full stop. asserted
Court → bind → precedent
Defendants also point to the letters referenced above, which they assert afford Plaintiffs post-deprivation notice of the revocations and an opportunity to be heard. asserted
they → point → revocations
And Defendants cite cases that suggest that such a post-deprivation process suffices in "extraordinary circumstances." asserted
process → cite → circumstances
These are such circumstances, Defendants argue, because Plaintiffs have endangered national security through their reporting. asserted
Plaintiffs → argue → reporting
But the circumstances here are not so "extraordinary" as to permit deviation from the "essential principle of due process" that a deprivation of liberty "be preceded by notice and opportunity for hearing." asserted
deprivation → permit → hearing
Zevallos holds that post-deprivation due process may suffice in unusual situations, such as when "providing notice before blocking the assets of international narcotics traffickers would create a substantial risk of asset flight." uncertain
providing → hold → flight
But nothing in the record suggests the need for such urgency here. uncertain
nothing → suggest → urgency
Indeed, some of the reporting identified by Defendants in the letters to Plaintiffs stretches back months or years. asserted
some → identify → Plaintiffs
The sorts of stories Defendants identify in the letters to Plaintiffs are routine. asserted
Defendants → identify → Plaintiffs
And as discussed further below, the Court is skeptical—at least on this record—that Defendants' interest in safeguarding national security is the actual motivation for, or is even advanced by, the revocation of Plaintiffs' hard passes. asserted
interest → discuss → passes
Finally, even if the circum-stances here allowed for post-deprivation process, Defendants are still left with the problem that, before the reporting at issue, Plaintiffs still did not "receive fair notice" of either the "conduct" that would lead to a sanction or of "the magnitude of the sanction that the White House might impose." uncertain
House → allow → that
{At the hearing on the Motion, Defendants argued that an adequate standard relating to the revocation of Plaintiffs' hard passes had been promulgated because the public is generally on notice that disclosure of classified information is unlawful. asserted
disclosure → argue → information
The Court is doubtful that the laws governing the retention, sharing, or mishandling of classified information provided Plaintiffs the sort of notice that satisfies Karem for several reasons, but especially given the lack of precedent for applying those laws to reporters. asserted
that → govern → reporters
Moreover, just as the record lacks factual support for Defendants' contention that the revocation of Plaintiffs' hard passes will in fact protect national security (as discussed below), the record also lacks factual support for Defendants' contention that Plaintiffs violated these statutes, at least at this stage.} asserted
Plaintiffs → lack → stage
[And] nothing in the record that predates this suit suggests that the revocation of Plaintiffs' hard passes was motivated by national security concerns. uncertain
revocation → predate → concerns
Certainly, that is not what President Trump said when he announced that he was "banning" Plaintiffs from the White House—instead, he focused on the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity of Plaintiffs' reporting. asserted
he → say → reporting
And even the justifications provided to Plaintiffs after this case was filed are ambiguous about the true purpose of the revocations: while Defendants' letters to Plaintiffs mention national security concerns, they purport to identify reporting that "threatened national security and/or spread falsehoods," leaving open the possibility that all the stories fall into the later bucket, rather than the former…. [T]he record [also] lacks factual support for Defendants' contention that the revocation of Plaintiffs' hard passes will in fact protect national security or that national security will be endangered if the Court orders their passes reinstated while this litigation proceeds. asserted
litigation → provide → security
…and 5 more, not listed.
💬Give feedback · no sign-in needed

No sign-in needed for now. Your note is sent without a name, so it cannot be answered.

🕘History 🎫Support