D.C. Judge: Due Process Wasn't Followed in Trump Media Ban

NewsMax ^ | 09/23/2026 | Michael Katz

[thegagline]

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., questioned Wednesday whether the Trump administration provided due process when it barred three major media outlets from access to the White House.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly said the administration's process did not appear to comply with two earlier D.C. Circuit rulings, Sherrill v. Knight and Karem v. Trump, requiring due process before reporters' hard passes can be revoked, the Washington Examiner reported.

"The government said those cases were wrongly decided," Kelly, an appointee of President Donald Trump, said at the hearing. "Maybe they were wrongly decided, maybe they weren't. But as a district court judge, I have to apply them.

I think it is fair to say the process the circuit laid out in those two cases wasn't followed here."

Trump announced Friday that CNN, MS Now and Politico were barred from the White House "effective immediately," accusing the outlets of reporting "FICTION and LIES." Reporters for all three organizations were denied entry to the White House grounds Saturday after their credentials were deactivated.

CNN, MS Now and Politico sued the Trump administration Monday, arguing that their exclusion based on the content of their reporting violates the First Amendment. The lawsuit also alleges that the administration violated their Fifth Amendment due process rights by revoking their White House access without notice or an opportunity to respond.

The Department of Justice defended the decision Tuesday in a court filing, arguing that White House access is a privilege rather than a right. The DOJ said the president can exclude outlets that he determines failed to meet standards of professionalism and decorum, including by publishing sensitive or classified information.

The administration said it gave the outlets an opportunity to respond in letters sent Tuesday that identified the reporting incidents it considered problematic, according to the Examiner.

***

---

TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 5thcolumnonfr; boldfacedliar; boldfacedtroll; constitution; judicialfiat; midtermtroll; propaganda; thefagline; thetdsline

[thegagline]

Perhaps an easier and more effective path would be to permit those currently barred “news” organizations to have access to the White House news conferences and ignore them—as in, actively shun them.

There is nothing in the Constitution that requires the president or his administration to call on and answer questions from anyone in the media. By doing this, it would freeze out the propagandists. Those “news” organizations would be placed in the untenable position of arguing that the president must call on reporters and answer their questions.

[blackdog]

Kick them all out then. Close it down. They can report on the administration from the Watergate Hotel.

[Mr. N. Wolfe]

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly.

Trump judge.

[SteelPSUGOP]

What do they mean by due process? Are we at a point where everything must be litigated?

If these judges, any judges, can’t cite the law requiring the the president to decide who, if anyone is allowed to have live access to the WH, then the judges are simply creating a legal circle jerk which Trump should ignore

Just like the public ignores CNN

[Rad_J]

I thought due process only applied to criminals. Is the judge saying the media is on trial for crimes?

[thegagline]

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly. Trump judge.

Yet another example of why Musk should be in charge of the hiring and Trump should do the firing. Each would be playing into their respective strengths.

[NEMDF]

I agree. If there is not a law requiring POTUS to allow certain or all media, then he’s not breaking a law, right?

[mass55th]

They had due process. They were warned to cut the crap and stop lying. They didn’t.

[KitJ]

I had no idea that Federal judges held so much authority over the Legislative and Executive branches until President Trump was elected. They didn’t teach me in school that the Judiciary runs the country through galactic injunctions to stop all government.

Black robes are running the table now. Too bad they’re not elected.

[/sarcasm]

[E. Pluribus Unum]

https://x.com/i/grok/share/a3fdca7c59994d509bcdd0dc7472acd6

Due process comes into play because long-standing court precedent treats White House “hard pass” press credentials (and the access they provide to the White House grounds) as a protected liberty (and sometimes property) interest under the Fifth Amendment. The government therefore cannot arbitrarily revoke or deny them without certain procedural safeguards.

Key legal backgroundIn Sherrill v. Knight (D.C. Circuit, 1977), the court held that a bona fide journalist’s interest in a White House press pass is protected by the First Amendment and “undoubtedly qualifies as liberty which may not be denied without due process of law under the fifth amendment.” Later cases (including Karem v. Trump in 2020 and the 2018 Jim Acosta litigation) reinforced this: before suspending or revoking a hard pass, the White House generally must provide:

• Explicit, published standards for the decision;
• Advance (pre-deprivation) notice of the alleged violation; and
• An opportunity to be heard/contest the decision.

Judge Timothy Kelly (the same Trump-appointed judge who ruled in the Acosta case) referenced this exact line of precedent in the recent hearing involving CNN, Politico, and MS NOW. He stated that due process “wasn’t followed here” and that the post-revocation letters the White House later sent were insufficient because they came after the credentials had already been deactivated and seized.

How this applies to the current ban

• The outlets argue the sudden revocation (announced via social media and enforced by seizing badges, with no prior notice or clear standards tied to their specific reporting) violated these due-process requirements, in addition to First Amendment claims of viewpoint discrimination/retaliation.
• The administration counters that White House access is a “privilege, not a right,” that post-deprivation process (the later letters giving a chance to respond by a deadline) is enough, and that older precedents should be overturned. It has also invoked national-security rationales in court papers (after initially citing negative coverage).

In short, due process is the procedural floor courts have required before the government can strip journalists of established White House press credentials. The current lawsuit tests whether that floor still applies when the White House cites security or other reasons for a blanket organizational ban. The judge has not yet ruled, but his comments indicated skepticism about the process used.

[mass55th]

Entry to the White House is a privilege, not a right. If you ban a visitor or group of visitors, does that visitor/visitors have the right to due process? Of course not. The security of the White House is first and foremost, and if a group of reporters become a threat to that security, then the President has every right to ban their presence in the White House. You aren’t required to provide due process in order to protect the security of the White House.

[yuleeyahoo]

Daily press briefings could be held live on youtube.

[vivenne]

Since when does Due Process apply to media groups at the WH?

[vivenne]

I think the judge just made that up.

[Repeal The 17th]

Nowhere does there exist a requirement for press conferences.
Just stop them.
Issue a “press release” whenever you think you need to.
Be done with them.

[Dr. Franklin]

Kick them all out then. Close it down. They can report on the administration from the Watergate Hotel.

If Trumps bans them all from the White House, how can they object? He could call it a security issue. I don't know how anyone calling themselves a news organization is entitled to access to the White House. In this day and age, the president can do a zoom meeting for a press conference and only permit favorable reporters to ask questions. No need for political statements masquerading as questions.

[Lurker]

Tell this judge to stuff it.

L

[Paladin2]

What Laws are governing this?

Some stuff legislated from the Bench?

[Brian Griffin]

I’m sorry, President Trump is not here.

He is holding meetings with a club and a golf ball.

Questions, please!

.....

Write it down on paper and drop it in the question box.

Next!

....

Write it down on paper and drop it in the question box.

Thank you for coming today.

Donuts and coffee are on the table outside this room.

[Varsity Flight]

Flak.

* Keep them out, anyway.

* The Constitution never gave the Judicial Branch, including the Supreme Court, final arbitration on the Branches.

* Stand, use the U.S. Martial Service and block access.

* And this goes for overriding the Stonewall of the Save Act.

* Adults vs. Burning Man tech hippies.