CNN, MS NOW, Politico Sue Trump Over White House Access Ban

CNN, MS NOW and Politico have filed a federal lawsuit against the administration of US President Donald Trump, challenging the decision to revoke their journalists’ access to the White House.

The three major news organisations are asking a federal court in Washington, DC, to intervene after the Trump administration barred their reporters from the White House grounds and deactivated or confiscated their press credentials.

The organisations argue that the administration’s action violated their First Amendment press rights and the Fifth Amendment’s due process protections, alleging that their access was withdrawn because of dissatisfaction with their reporting.

The case was filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, with the media organisations seeking expedited consideration of their challenge and an order restoring their access to the White House.

The lawsuit names President Donald Trump, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, White House spokesperson Steven Cheung and Secret Service Director Sean Curran as defendants.

The legal action followed Trump’s decision to exclude the three organisations from the White House after he accused them of publishing what he described as “fake news” about his administration.

Trump has argued that journalists remain free to report on him but that the administration is not required to provide White House access to every news organisation.

The president also defended the decision on social media, where he characterised the affected outlets as a threat to national security. The reports on the lawsuit did not indicate that the administration had presented evidence publicly establishing such a threat.

The dispute escalated on Saturday, September 19, when reporters working for CNN, MS NOW and Politico were turned away from the White House complex.

Their press access was reportedly deactivated or their credentials confiscated, preventing them from covering activities inside the presidential complex in the usual manner.

The organisations subsequently warned that the White House decision raised broader questions about whether a presidential administration could deny access to journalists because of disagreement with their reporting.

READ ALSO:

• JAMB Allows Candidates to Change Lost SIM, Email Addresses
• How Nigerians Can Get Federal High Court Affidavit Online Without Visiting Court
• Plateau Violence: Several Killed as Fresh Attacks Trigger Mass Exodus

In their court challenge, the outlets are expected to argue that the government cannot use access to public officials and government facilities as a means of punishing or influencing the content of news coverage.

The case comes as the Trump administration has significantly changed the way White House press access is managed.

The administration has increasingly exercised greater control over which journalists attend certain presidential events, while also expanding access for reporters from organisations it considers more favourable or less represented in traditional White House press coverage.

The latest dispute, however, concerns the removal of access from three established national news organisations at the same time.

The White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) has criticised the exclusion of the outlets and raised concerns about the implications for press access and government transparency.

Other media organisations and press-freedom groups have also expressed concern over the decision, arguing that government officials should not determine access based on whether they approve of particular news coverage.

The White House, on the other hand, has maintained that the administration has authority to determine access to the White House and has repeatedly accused some mainstream news organisations of inaccurate or unfair reporting.

The legal battle also has implications beyond the three organisations involved because federal courts have previously considered disputes between the executive branch and news organisations over access to the president.

One prominent case involved CNN reporter Jim Acosta during Trump’s first administration.

In 2018, the White House revoked Acosta’s press credentials following a confrontation during a presidential news conference. CNN challenged the decision in court, and a federal judge ordered the temporary restoration of his access.

The Trump administration has also been involved in a more recent dispute with the Associated Press.

The administration restricted AP’s access after the news agency declined to adopt Trump’s preferred terminology for the Gulf of Mexico. A federal judge later ordered the administration to restore the AP’s access in certain circumstances, although subsequent litigation resulted in distinctions between generally accessible areas and more restricted presidential events.

The current lawsuit involving CNN, MS NOW and Politico raises related but distinct questions about the government’s authority to control press access.

A central issue is expected to be whether the administration can exclude news organisations from access that is otherwise made available to members of the White House press corps because of disagreement with their reporting.

Another issue is the extent to which the First Amendment limits government decisions affecting journalists’ access, particularly when the alleged reason for exclusion is connected to the content or viewpoint of their reporting.

The media organisations are also challenging the process used to revoke their access, arguing that they were not given adequate notice or an opportunity to contest the decision before their credentials were withdrawn.

The case has already affected White House media arrangements beyond routine presidential coverage.

CNN had been scheduled to provide the television pool feed for Trump’s Monday trip to New York for the United Nations General Assembly, but the assignment was removed from the White House press schedule following the access dispute.

The White House press pool is important because participating organisations provide shared coverage, photographs, video and other material that can be used by news organisations that cannot send their own journalists to every presidential event.

The lawsuit therefore places questions of press freedom, government transparency and presidential control over media access at the centre of another federal court dispute involving the Trump administration.

For the three organisations, the immediate objective is restoration of access to the White House and the ability of their journalists to resume reporting from the presidential complex.

For the administration, the dispute involves its stated authority to determine who receives access to the White House and how that access is organised.

The court’s handling of the case could provide further guidance on the constitutional limits surrounding White House press credentials, particularly where access decisions are alleged to be connected to the content of journalists’ reporting.

Until the court rules, the competing claims remain disputed. The lawsuit itself does not establish that the administration violated the Constitution, while the White House’s allegations against the news organisations remain the administration’s stated position rather than findings by a court.

CNN, MS NOW, Politico Sue Trump Over White House Access Ban

18 Suspects Transferred to US Over 2021 Killing of Haitian President Moïse

Eighteen suspects accused of involvement in the 2021 assassination of former Haitian President Jovenel Moise have been transferred from Haiti to the United States to face trial.

US officials said the suspects were transported to Florida on Sunday, as American authorities continue their prosecution of people allegedly connected to the plot.

Federal prosecutor Jason Reding Quinones said the suspects were flown from Haiti on a military aircraft to face proceedings in the Southern District of Florida.

He said US authorities had so far indicted 30 people in connection with the assassination and warned that the prosecutions were not over.

Among those transferred was Joseph Felix Badio, a former anti-corruption official with Haiti’s Ministry of Justice who has been identified as a major suspect in the investigation.

Haitian government and police sources said the other suspects included Colombian nationals who were allegedly part of the group involved in the operation.

READ ALSO:

• My Heart Has Always Been Home With You — Tinubu’s Powerful Message to Oluremi at 66
• Tinubu’s UNGA Absence Fuels Questions Over Planned Trump Meeting
• Messi Fires Stunning 75th Career Free-Kick to Reach 930 Goals in Inter Miami Draw

Colombian Nationals Among Suspects

Colombia’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that 17 of its citizens had been transferred from Haiti to the United States.

The ministry said the Colombian government was monitoring the development but had not participated in the decision or process that led to the transfer.

Moise was killed at his private residence in Port-au-Prince on July 7, 2021. Investigators said a group of about 20 Colombian military-trained mercenaries had been hired in connection with the operation.

The president’s security detail came under scrutiny after failing to prevent the attack.

In May, four men were convicted in a Miami federal court over charges connected to the plot, including conspiracy to kill or kidnap Moise and providing material support for the operation. They could face life imprisonment.

US prosecutors said the men were linked to CTU Security, a Florida-based private security company, and had allegedly been attracted by the prospect of lucrative contracts after Moise was removed from power.

The assassination plunged Haiti further into political and security turmoil. The country has since struggled with gang violence and remains without a president, while preparations continue for elections scheduled for December, subject to security conditions.

18 Suspects Transferred to US Over 2021 Killing of Haitian President Moïse

Trump Bans CNN, MS NOW, Politico From White House Over ‘Fake News’

WASHINGTON — United States President Donald Trump has announced restrictions barring CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, accusing the three media organisations of repeatedly publishing what he described as “fake news” about his administration.

Trump announced the decision on Friday, September 18, 2026, in a post on his Truth Social platform, declaring that the restrictions were effective immediately.

The president accused the organisations of reporting what he called “fiction and lies” about him, his administration and the United States, while warning that other media outlets could also face similar restrictions.

The announcement has opened another confrontation between the Trump administration and the American media, with press-freedom advocates and journalists raising questions about the constitutional limits of presidential control over access to the White House.

The dispute also escalated on Saturday after journalists working for MS NOW were denied entry to the White House grounds, providing the clearest indication that the administration had begun enforcing at least part of Trump’s announced restrictions.

Trump, speaking to reporters in the Oval Office after making the announcement, defended the decision and said the three organisations had engaged in what he regarded as deliberately negative coverage of his administration.

“They’re fake news,” Trump said when asked about the decision, adding that other media organisations could also be affected if they continued with what he described as unfair reporting.

Trump did not identify a single report that prompted the action. Instead, he pointed to what he characterised as the organisations’ overall coverage of his presidency.

He also criticised other major American news organisations, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, suggesting that additional outlets could face restrictions.

However, no ban on either newspaper was immediately announced.

The White House action initially created uncertainty because journalists from the three targeted organisations remained on the White House grounds after Trump’s announcement on Friday.

READ ALSO:

• Jetour Unleashes F700 Hybrid Pickup as Abuja Experience Begins Tuesday 
• “She Wanted to Stay Single”: Rema Opens Up About Rejection That Inspired Hit Song ‘Oh No’
• Ronaldo Included in Portugal’s Nations League Squad as Jorge Jesus Begins New Era

CNN journalists were still working from the network’s White House workspace, while CNN also had personnel involved in the television pool covering Vice President JD Vance.

The situation changed on Saturday when MS NOW journalists were denied access to the White House grounds.

The development raised fresh questions about whether the administration intended to apply the restrictions to physical access, press credentials, White House workspaces, presidential events and media pools, or all forms of coverage from the presidential complex.

It was not immediately clear whether CNN journalists had also been denied entry on Saturday, while Politico journalists are generally not based at the White House during weekends.

Trump was spending the weekend at Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland.

The president’s action has drawn a strong response from the affected organisations.

CNN rejected the move and said it stood behind its White House reporting team. The network maintained that journalists should be able to report from the White House without government interference and indicated that it would challenge any formal restriction that violated its constitutional protections.

Politico also rejected the president’s allegations and said it would continue covering the Trump administration and future administrations.

The organisation said it would defend its First Amendment rights against attempts to restrict its access to government officials and presidential activities.

MS NOW also condemned the restriction after its journalists were denied entry, saying it would pursue available measures to protect its constitutional rights and the public’s access to information about government activities.

The White House Correspondents’ Association also criticised the administration’s decision.

The association argued that freedom of the press should not depend on whether a president agrees with the coverage produced by a particular news organisation or approves of questions asked by its journalists.

The controversy has also attracted the attention of major press-freedom organisations, which have warned that excluding news organisations because of dissatisfaction with their reporting could raise serious constitutional questions.

The First Amendment protects freedom of the press in the United States, although the government also has authority to regulate access to secure government facilities.

The central legal question is therefore likely to concern whether the White House can selectively exclude particular news organisations because the administration objects to their reporting or perceived editorial position.

The latest dispute follows an earlier confrontation between the Trump administration and the Associated Press over White House access.

In 2025, the White House restricted AP journalists from certain presidential events after the news organisation declined to adopt Trump’s preferred name, “Gulf of America”, for the body of water traditionally known as the Gulf of Mexico.

The AP challenged the restrictions in court, turning the dispute into a wider legal battle over presidential control of press access.

Trump has also had a previous major confrontation with CNN over White House access.

During his first presidency, the White House revoked CNN correspondent Jim Acosta’s press credentials following a contentious exchange between Acosta and Trump at a November 2018 press conference.

CNN challenged the decision in court, and a federal judge temporarily ordered the restoration of Acosta’s access. The White House later restored his credentials permanently.

The latest dispute is therefore occurring against the background of several years of tension between Trump and major American news organisations.

Trump has repeatedly criticised media outlets whose reporting he considers unfair or inaccurate, while journalists and press-freedom groups have argued that government officials should not determine access to the presidency according to whether they approve of news coverage.

Another issue raised by Trump’s latest announcement is the absence of specific reports identified by the president as the basis for the restrictions.

Rather than pointing to one article or broadcast, Trump referred broadly to what he described as the organisations’ continued publication of negative and false reports.

The president also raised the issue of government spending on Politico subscriptions while defending his decision.

Politico has rejected suggestions that its government subscriptions amounted to improper financial support, arguing that such claims were misleading.

Trump’s warning that other media organisations could also be targeted has added another dimension to the dispute.

The president has suggested that additional outlets could be excluded from the White House if he believes they continue to engage in what he considers unfair reporting.

That possibility has heightened concerns among journalists about the future of White House press access and whether the administration could establish different levels of access for media organisations based on their editorial coverage.

The immediate focus, however, is on how the restrictions against CNN, MS NOW and Politico will be implemented.

Questions remain over whether the administration will issue formal rules covering press credentials, presidential events, White House workspaces and press pools.

The organisations affected have indicated that they intend to continue covering the Trump administration and defend their rights to do so.

The confrontation could consequently develop into another major legal battle over the relationship between the White House and the American press, with the outcome potentially affecting how journalists gain access to the presidency.

For now, the denial of entry to MS NOW journalists represents a significant development from Friday’s announcement, when the precise scope of the proposed ban remained unclear.

The unfolding dispute places White House press access, media freedom and First Amendment protections at the centre of another major confrontation between President Trump and the American news media.

Trump Bans CNN, MS NOW, Politico From White House Over ‘Fake News’