Trump says CNN, MS NOW and Politico are banned from White House

Donald Trump said Friday, Sept. 18, 2026, that he is banning CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House because of their coverage, setting up another potential dispute over the administration’s treatment of news organizations and First Amendment protections.

Trump announced the move on social media, saying the three outlets were being barred “effective immediately” because of what he characterized as false reporting. He also suggested additional news organizations could face similar restrictions.

It was not immediately clear how broadly the White House planned to apply the bans, including whether reporters from the organizations would lose White House credentials entirely or be excluded from specific briefings, presidential events and press pool assignments.

That distinction could be significant legally.

The White House is not required to provide every journalist access to every presidential event, and presidents have considerable discretion over interviews and events where only a limited number of reporters can be accommodated.

News organizations cannot be barred from reporting on events in the White House — even if they are banned — but on-site access helps them reach White House staff and events and fosters a community among journalists. 

Federal courts have also established limits on how the government can restrict access after opening White House press facilities to journalists.

In the 1977 case Sherrill v. Knight, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held that the White House could not arbitrarily deny a press pass to a bona fide journalist. The court said First Amendment interests are implicated when reporters are excluded from White House press facilities and required the government to provide notice, an opportunity to respond and a written explanation when credentials are denied.

Advertisement

The court also recognized that legitimate government interests, including presidential security, can justify restrictions. At the same time, it said arbitrary or content-based standards for issuing press credentials are prohibited.

More recent litigation involving The Associated Press has tested how those principles apply when an administration restricts access because of an outlet’s editorial decisions.

The White House limited AP access to certain events in 2025 after the organization continued using “Gulf of Mexico” in its own writing following Trump’s order changing the federal name to “Gulf of America.”

A federal district judge issued a preliminary injunction requiring the administration to stop excluding the AP based on its viewpoint from the White House press pool and certain other limited-access events when comparable journalists were admitted.

The D.C. Circuit later stayed most of that injunction while the administration appealed, leaving the restriction in place for many limited-access events while preserving part of the order involving the White House East Room. The appeals court subsequently declined to reconsider that stay as a full court.

The AP case remains unresolved, meaning there is not yet a final appellate ruling settling exactly how much discretion the White House has when choosing journalists for small press pools and other restricted events.

A blanket ban imposed specifically because the president objects to an organization’s reporting could raise a different constitutional issue than routine decisions about space, security or press pool composition. Courts have generally treated government retaliation against journalists based on viewpoint more skeptically than neutral restrictions governing access.

Trump’s announcement follows a series of clashes between his administration and news organizations. Since returning to office, he has pursued litigation against outlets including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and the BBC, while frequently criticizing individual journalists and organizations over coverage he considers unfair.

Since taking office, Trump’s administration has reshaped access to coveted on-site office space and access to briefings and other events, with digital and non-traditional media being given more access. This led to legacy and even older digital outlets losing space.

The Pentagon has also implemented significant restrictions on press access and requested that any organization wishing to continue to occupy office space without the building agree to a lengthy set of demands, causing a slew of media outlets to move out of the space, saying they could not agree to the terms being set out and still be objective journalists. 

The latest action also comes as the AP continues its court challenge over White House access, a case that could help define how First Amendment protections apply when an administration chooses which news organizations can attend limited presidential events.

Advertisement