Freedom of the Press or Freedom From the Press? Trump Bans ‘Fake News’ From White House

President Trump announced last week that CNN, MSNOW (formerly MSNBC), and Politico are banned from the White House, citing “constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS” and “fiction and lies:”

“I am proud to announce that, effective immediately, I am banning Fake News CNN, MSNOW (who recently changed their name from MSNBC due to lack of viewership and credibility!), and Politico (The recipients of an illegal and ridiculous $8 Million Dollar subscription, an All Time Record, directly from the United States Government, under Crooked Joe Biden, in order to keep them ‘alive.’ Seems like corruption to me!), from the White House as a result of their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!” Trump posted on social media. “Media Outlets shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President of the United States of America.”

All three “news” outlets announced Monday they would be suing the Trump administration in federal court. CNN called the move illegal, citing First Amendment violations.

As I posted to X:

This is what the First Amendment actually says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Speech and press are not the same as a blank check. The Supreme Court has long held that the government may regulate certain categories of expression and may impose content-neutral restrictions on time, place, and manner. Examples: Incitement to imminent lawless action True threats Defamation Obscenity Fraud and certain commercial speech Copyright and other intellectual-property limits Narrow national-security restrictions.

Your freedom of speech has not been abridged, nor has freedom of the press.

This is what the First Amendment actually says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the… https://t.co/AWNWMnUZS0

— Katy Grimes (@KATYSaccitizen) September 19, 2026

The ban took effect the next day and reporters from those outlets were turned away at the gates and had their hard passes disabled or confiscated. Trump said the decision was based on “cumulative stories” rather than one incident and warned that other outlets could follow.

Is this a violation of the First Amendment, or a rectification of corrupted media outlets?

I feel somewhat qualified to address this as the California Legislature revoked my press credentials ten years ago, but not for “FAKE NEWS” or “fiction and lies,” instead claiming that the news outlet I reported for was illegitimate as the owner also had a consulting business.

We legally challenged the Legislature on First Amendment violations and won. Had the Legislature accused me of reporting “fiction and lies,” it may still have been a First Amendment legal argument. However, nothing I reported was “fiction and lies” – I didn’t need to make anything up… they just didn’t like that I reported first hand on exactly what they were doing, the bills they passed, the arguments they made in committee hearings, and the constitutional laws they violated with their legislation. 

But are “fiction and lies” enough to boot members of the press from the White House?

In my case, a Legislative Open Records Act request submitted by the Pacific Legal Foundation requested the last 10 years of press credential applications, approvals and denials. In the 10 years of records received, there were no denials of press credentials… until mine. We noted that Bloomberg News’ CEO and publisher is one of the country’s most renowned lobbyists. We also discovered that a number of reporters whose publishers are involved in political consultancy or lobby nevertheless received press credentials. Even some lobbyists were issued press credentials.

What was most telling was the process exposed the air of supremacy and inability for self-reflection among California’s liberal media and mainstream journalists, who viewed themselves as unimpeachable and above reproach – a common thread with White House journalists.

As I noted above, speech and press are not the same as a blank check, and CNN, MS NOW and Politico have indeed reported “fiction and lies.”

Trump wrote on social media when he made the announcement, “Media Outlets shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President of the United States of America.” 

He’s correct. At what point is media inciting violence, subverting the Trump administration, and fomenting dangerous tactics, far beyond “informing the public.”

In January 2025, Joe Concha with the New York Post expressed this eloquently and accurately:

“First, the landscape the legacy media once controlled is no more.

No longer do the liberal media ecosystems of New York and Washington, DC, set the terms of the national conversation.

No longer do a handful of major corporate entities like ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, the New York Times and Washington Post regulate thought and debate.”

President Trump’s move comes after years of flagrantly biased “reporting,” and many proven lies – the Kavanaugh fake rape lies, the Charlottesville “there are many fine people on both sides” lie, Russia collusion lie, rape allegations, stealing White House documents lie…

The leftist media sees itself as an arm of the Democrat Party, and acts accordingly, covering up Democrat corruption: Hunter Biden’s laptop, covering for President Biden’s obvious dementia, relentlessly pushed the Russia collusion hoax, reported that the Trump campaign’s 2024 Madison Square Garden rally was the equivalent of a Nazi rally, the Benghazi Libya lie, Operation Fast and Furious, Solyndra and green-energy loans, The Clinton Global Initiative, IRS targeting Tea Party groups…

CNN’s Jake Tapper even tried to gloss over Biden’s dementia, then wrote about it in his book, as an open secret he had no part in.

As the Federalist notes:

“The three corporate outlets are well known for advancing hoaxes and giving unquestioning favorable coverage to Democrats, tantamount to in-kind political donations. Each outlet’s abuses are too many to count, and most of them overlap, but there are some particularly egregious ones.”

President Trump’s statement that “Media Outlets shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President of the United States of America,” The Federalist explains this:

In fact, all three outlets did that. It was then-MSNBC that called the gathering a “Nazi” rally, while Politico said it had “racist and vulgar remarks.” CNN said it had “violent and vulgar rhetoric.”

CNN claimed without evidence that Trump called U.S. soldiers killed in action “suckers” and “losers,” and advanced the “very fine people” Charlottesville hoax.

Trump getting shot in Butler, Pennsylvania, was not enough to keep CNN in line, as it downplayed the shooting, initially claiming the rally was merely “interrupted by Secret Service.” The outlet then went further, blaming Trump for the assassination attempts.

CNN was also doing the bidding of disgraced former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci, who fed questions to propagandist Jake Tapper to undermine the Trump administration’s coronavirus response. According to CNN, punishing dissent was in their job description.

It’s rich that these media outlets are hiding behind “a free press” and the First Amendment, when they trampled on the First Amendment during the Covid pandemic, never questioning government tyranny.

Legal observers have noted that tying access directly to reporting content raises First Amendment issues and is likely to face court challenges. 

This is not an isolated incident. Previous administrations did restrict press access:

• Obama White House: In 2009 the administration tried to exclude Fox News from a pool interview with an official, arguing it was not a legitimate news organization. Other networks objected and the White House backed down. Obama also held far fewer informal Q-and-A sessions with the press pool than Clinton or Bush and faced criticism for limiting photographer access and source contacts. 
• Biden White House: In 2023 it tightened eligibility for “hard passes,” requiring recent campus visits and proof of employment with a news organization. The number of hard-pass holders fell from about 1,417 to 975; many lapsed because holders had not used them recently. Biden also held fewer formal press conferences and sometimes had aides clear reporters from events before he took questions.

As Joe Concha noted:

“the loss of respect that followed the legacy media’s gross breaches of integrity and ethics in recent years.

Many in the media debased themselves by blatantly lying about the state of Joe Biden’s cognitive abilities (or lack thereof).

They openly cheered on Kamala Harris’ campaign and tried to Etch-a-Sketch her radical positions (and those of her goofy running mate, Tim Walz) out of existence, laughably selling them as joyous, centrist candidates.

And all the while, they trashed Donald Trump and his supporters as fascist and uninformed.

Donald Trump secured two notable settlements from legacy media companies for lies or deliberate news manipulations benefitting Democrats: