White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt achieved an early win in the Trump administration’s legal battle against a lawsuit brought by the Associated Press.

U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden decided not to immediately reinstate the news outlet’s access to certain events involving President Donald Trump, including entry to the Oval Office and Air Force One.

The Associated Press has alleged that the administration violated its First Amendment rights by attempting to control the language used in their news reporting, as well as its Fifth Amendment rights to due process. This claim arose after senior Trump officials excluded the Associated Press from events for not using the term ‘Gulf of America.’

Alongside Leavitt, the suit names White House chief of staff Susan Wiles and Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich. 

But McFadden, who was appointed to the US District Court in Washington DC by Trump, gave a number of reasons for denying the request for emergency relief at this stage – including that he was not persuaded that the wire service was facing ‘irreparable harm’ as a result of the ban, according to CNN.

He said the news organization ‘can get access to the same information’ from the pool notes that are given to all members of the White House Correspondent’s Association, even if it’s barred from newsworthy events.

McFadden also argued that the news organization’s delay in bringing the lawsuit was evidence it wasn’t harmed in any way that necessitated immediate action. 

‘I can’t say the AP has shown a likelihood of success here,’ the judge said at a court hearing. 

Still, the judge appeared to have questioned the legality of the ban, describing it at one point as ‘discriminatory’ and ‘problematic.’ 

He also admitted that the decades-long practice of having a wire service at presidential news events is something that the White House has long accepted.

‘It feels a little odd that the White House is bound by certain decisions that this private organization is making,’ McFadden said, adding that it appears the White House discriminated against the AP due to its coverage choices.

‘That does feel kind of problematic here,’ he said. 

‘It might be a good idea for the White House to think about whether what they’re doing is really appropriate given the case law,’ the judge added after an attorney for the outlet argued to the judge that the White House was trying to force the news organization to adopt ‘official government vocabulary.’

Charles Tobin went on to say that the ban’s ‘ground seems to be shifting,’ claiming its scope expanded in recent days to include both Associated Press reporters and photographers.

It now ‘appears as though it is a total bar’ of the organization’s access to nearly all White House press events.’

Tobin also claimed that the Trump administration ‘picked on AP and nobody else’ because the news organization publishes the widely-used stylebook for media outlets.

He argued that the government wanted his client to ‘help them in their mission of changing the national vocabulary’ as he likened journalism to a jury trial in which reporters and photographers must be able to observe the president the same way jurors assess a witness’s credibility on stand, the New York Times reports.

But attorneys from the Department of Justice  – which is representing the Trump administration in the federal suit – urged McFadden not to intervene at this point, arguing that the ban has not impaired the outlet’s ability to report thoroughly on the president.

They argued the AP does not have a constitutional right to what they called ‘special media access to the president’ and said it is the president’s prerogative to choose which members of the news media to allow in otherwise restricted areas.

‘They do not have a constitutional right to continue that access in perpetuity,’ said Brian Hudak, a Justice Department lawyer defending the Trump officials.

‘If tomorrow the White House decides to eliminate the pool, I think they can do that,’ he argued, adding that journalists are granted access to the White House at the president’s ‘grace and discretion.’ 

He went on to claim that the AP’s access was now similar to that other news organizations have.

Following the ruling, Leavitt said the Trump administration stands by its decision to limit the AP’s access to the president.

‘As we have said from the beginning, asking the President of the United States questions in the Oval Office and aboard Air Force One is a privilege granted to journalists, not a legal right.’

President Trump also celebrated the news, posting a photo of the Briefing Room displaying signs reading ‘Victory: Gulf of America.’

Meanwhile, Associated Press spokeswoman Lauren Easton said it looks ‘forward to our next hearing on March 20 where we will continue to stand for the right of the press and the public to speak freely to government retaliation.

‘This is a fundamental American freedom,’ she argued. 

McFadden’s decision came as the White House Correspondent’s Association filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the Associated Press. 

It said that Trump’s ban ‘threatens the integrity of the White House press corps and its first-line coverage of the American presidency’ and that it ‘will chill and distort news coverage of the president to the public’s detriment.’

More than 40 news organizations had previously signed onto a letter organized by the White House Correspondents’ Association pushing the White House to reverse the AP ban. The letter’s existence was first reported by Oliver Darcy’s Status news. 

Even right-leaning Fox News Channel and the even more right-wing Newsmax signed on. 

‘We can understand President Trump’s frustration because the media has often been unfair to him, but Newsmax still supports the AP’s right, as a private organization, to use the language it wants to use in its reporting,’ Newsmax said in a statement obtained by DailyMail.com.