President Donald Trump's ban on the three media companies from the White House is likely unconstitutional, federal judge Tim Kelly wrote in his ruling, which states that media access to the White House should be restored.
The decision is temporary and valid for two weeks, during which the matter will be further reviewed.
Despite the decision, reporters and photographers from the three media outlets were denied access to the White House on Thursday. A Politico reporter also had his accreditation revoked, the site reports.
But around 6 p.m. Swedish time, CNN and MS NOW were able to announce that at least individual journalists had been granted access to the White House. An hour earlier, the barred media outlets had turned to federal court and pointed out that the White House was not acting in line with the court's decision.
Not legally secure?
In his decision on Thursday night, Judge Tim Kelly referred to the fact that the process in which the journalists' press cards were revoked had not been carried out in a legally sound manner.
“The ‘general rule’ is that individuals must be notified and given the opportunity to speak before the state deprives them of something that is constitutionally protected,” Tim Kelly wrote, according toCNN .
Citizens' right to a fair trial is addressed, among other things, in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution .
Setback for Trump
The announcement of the revocation is a setback for the Trump administration, which has alleged that CNN, MS NOW and Politico in particular are spreading “fake news.” Trump’s Justice Department has further argued that the media’s coverage of, in particular, the Iran war and the president’s construction of a banquet hall in the White House could pose a threat to national security.
The three media outlets filed a lawsuit after they were banned on Friday, claiming that the ban is a violation of the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of the press and speech.
