WASHINGTON – A federal judge early Thursday temporarily halted President Donald Trump’s effort to bar three news organizations from the White House grounds, ordering the restoration of access for CNN, MS NOW and Politico.
The ruling marks the latest turn in an intensifying dispute between Trump and media outlets whose reporting he has criticized. Trump announced the ban Sept. 18, accusing the organizations of producing what he called “fake news.” More recently, he has argued that negative coverage poses a danger to the country.
CNN, MS NOW and Politico argued that they were targeted because of the viewpoints expressed in their coverage. The outlets described the ban as a “blatant violation” of the First Amendment.
In an order issued shortly after midnight, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly said the outlets had satisfied the legal requirements for a temporary restraining order. Those requirements include showing a likelihood of success in the case and a risk of irreparable harm without court intervention.
“This is a high bar, but Plaintiffs have met it,” Kelly wrote.
Kelly, whom Trump nominated in 2017, heard arguments Wednesday but concluded the hearing without issuing an immediate decision. The judge previously ordered the restoration of access for a CNN journalist in a similar case in 2018.
DISCOVER MORE: Mystery of Idaho’s “Unknown Wanderer” Solved After 43 Years
The temporary restraining order took effect Thursday and will remain in place for 14 days. Such orders are generally intended to preserve existing conditions while the court conducts a more detailed examination of the dispute.
During Wednesday’s hearing, Kelly questioned whether the administration had fulfilled its legal obligations and given the three outlets adequate due process before revoking their access.
Two earlier press-access cases, including one that reached the U.S. Supreme Court, established that journalists must receive an opportunity to respond before their press credentials are revoked.
Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik contended that the precedents from those cases were wrongly decided.
Kelly said he would follow the precedents from comparable First Amendment cases in reaching his decision, even though the government disputes those rulings.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.