CNN, MS NOW, and Politico amend lawsuit over White House press pool exclusions

CNN, MS NOW, and Politico have filed an amended complaint against the White House, alleging continued retaliatory and viewpoint-based discrimination in the administration's press operations. The three news organizations accuse the Trump administration of violating the First and Fifth Amendments by interfering with the established press pool system. This legal update follows a recent court order that halted the president's broader ban on these outlets, yet the groups claim specific exclusions persist.

The core of the dispute involves the press pool, a long-standing tradition where news organizations take turns covering the president in close quarters, including the Oval Office and Air Force One. The amended lawsuit states that the outlets do not claim an unrestricted right to enter these spaces. However, it argues that once the White House opens these areas to selected journalists for newsgathering, it cannot exclude plaintiffs because it dislikes their coverage.

Since the president announced the ban on September 18, CNN has been barred from traveling aboard Air Force One on all six occasions it was scheduled to serve as the designated television pool network. The lawsuit notes that CNN has fulfilled this role for more than four decades. Politico has also been excluded from two scheduled out-of-town pool assignments in recent weeks. MS NOW has not participated in the secondary television pool since September 18, a spot selected by the White House.

Ted Boutrous, the outside counsel for the three outlets, threatened further legal action last week if the White House continued to bar reporters from specific areas. He requested confirmation that the administration would abandon any policy of excluding CNN from the Oval Office and Air Force One. The administration did not respond to this request, leading to the Wednesday afternoon court filing.

The amended complaint asks the court to declare the president's ban and subsequent unconstitutional actions unlawful. It seeks permanent injunctive relief in favor of the three news organizations. This follows a decision two weeks ago by U.S. District Judge Timothy P. Kelly, who granted a preliminary injunction restoring the outlets' White House access. Kelly found that the ban likely violated the First Amendment by discriminating against journalists based on their coverage. The judge had previously issued a temporary restraining order on Fifth Amendment grounds.

The White House complied with the court's order and reinstated the journalists' press credentials. However, the outlets maintain that the administration continues to retaliate by disrupting the press pool. The lawsuit asserts that the Oval Office and Air Force One are primary spaces for journalists to interact with and gather news about the president. It states that 97% of the nearly 5,000 questions the president has entertained from reporters in these traditional areas occurred in the Oval Office or in connection with Air Force One travel.

The administration appears to be relying on an ongoing court case involving The Associated Press, which filed suit last year after Trump blocked AP reporters from areas with limited space. In June 2025, an appeals court panel partially lifted a stay for the AP, stating that restricted presidential spaces are not First Amendment fora opened for private speech. Boutrous noted that this ruling is non-binding and non-precedential. In a statement on Wednesday, Boutrous said the exclusions continue to violate the First Amendment and due process, making it harder for the press to cover important events for the American people.