CNN, MSNBC, and Politico filed a motion asking a federal judge to stop the White House from banning them. The attorney claims it violates the First Amendment. The First Amendment does not guarantee you a press pass. It guarantees the government won't throw you in prison for what you write. Nobody explained this to the attorney.
The outlets want the court to intervene before their legal case concludes. They need access now, not later, because apparently waiting for due process would hurt their feelings. This is the equivalent of a kid calling his mom during a timeout to complain the timeout is unfair.
Here's what's happening. The White House doesn't want to answer questions from these three outlets. The outlets believe this is unconstitutional. The Constitution does not contain a clause requiring the President to stand in a room and get yelled at by people he doesn't like. I checked. It's not in there.
The attorney argues the ban prevents the outlets from doing their jobs. Their jobs involve asking questions the White House won't answer and then writing articles about how the White House won't answer questions. You can do that from anywhere. You don't need a press pass. You need a laptop and a sense of grievance, both of which these outlets have in abundance.
The motion requests a temporary restraining order. This is a legal mechanism designed to prevent immediate and irreparable harm. The harm in this case is that CNN might have to report news the same way every other outlet without White House access does, which is to say by making phone calls and reading statements like a f*cking normal person.
The judge will now decide whether being ignored by the government constitutes a First Amendment violation or just hurts your feelings. Spoiler: it's the second one, but the case will drag on for months because lawyers bill by the hour and these outlets have nothing better to spend money on.
Photo by Nils Huenerfuerst on Unsplash
Leave a Comment