CNN, MS NOW and Politico seek to extend block on White House access ban

Three news organisations removed from White House grounds this month have asked a federal court to keep their access in place until their legal challenge is decided, arguing that the administration has continued to apply the ban unevenly even after a judge temporarily halted it.

Lawyers for CNN, MS NOW and Politico filed the request late on Monday, saying the White House had "persisted in unpredictably and inconsistently implementing its ban." They pointed to the exclusion of CNN from a designated television pool assignment on September 26 as evidence that the restrictions were still being enforced in practice.

The filing argued that without a preliminary injunction, the administration would move quickly to reinstate a full ban on the three outlets. It described the restrictions as an unlawful infringement of First Amendment protections that would cause irreparable harm to the organisations and to the public.

US District Judge Timothy Kelly issued a two-week temporary restraining order last week, restoring the outlets' access, but that order is due to expire on October 8. The injunction now sought would extend access until the case is finally resolved.

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., the lead attorney for the three outlets, said the ban amounted to a blatant violation of the First Amendment and due process, and that its purpose was to punish reporting the president dislikes. He called it retaliation and viewpoint discrimination.

The dispute has also drawn in the White House broadcast pool, a rotating arrangement involving CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox News. CNN was removed from its pool duties when the ban took effect, prompting the other networks to suspend the pool in solidarity. CNN was allowed to cover the president alongside Chinese leader Xi Jinping at the National Archives on Friday, but was barred from Air Force One the following day for a trip to a college football game in Tennessee. The rest of the pool declined to provide a replacement.

The administration has maintained that access to the White House is a privilege rather than a right. Attorney General Todd Blanche said on ABC on Sunday that the president has every right to decide who travels on his plane, and that he was tired of certain outlets refusing to report accurate news. Blanche characterised what he described as misinformation as a national security concern.

Judge Kelly, in granting the temporary restraining order, wrote that the court was sceptical that safeguarding national security was the actual motivation behind the removal of access. His ruling did not directly address the pool rotation.

In the new filing, the outlets set out the role the pool plays in routine coverage of the president and argued that it must be restored. They noted that CNN received no official explanation for its exclusion from Air Force One and that, because no replacement was designated, no primary television network pooler accompanied the president on that trip.

Networks in the pool are handling the standoff on a case-by-case basis, according to a person familiar with its operation. Fox covered a pool event on Sunday and NBC covered the president in the Oval Office on Monday. CNN is not in the rotation until Thursday, and if it is again barred, the networks will decide together whether to provide a replacement or refrain from coverage.

The choices are difficult. Networks want to defend press freedom and resist pressure on coverage, while also serving their audiences. David A. Schulz of Yale Law School's Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic said there were few good options and that networks could use their market power, adding that the question was who would back down first. RonNell Andersen Jones, a law professor at the University of Utah, said the networks may feel caught between competing obligations, since capitulation could be seen as abandoning press freedom while prolonged blackouts of White House news carry their own costs.