Appeals Court: Trump Can Keep Associated Press Out Of White House

President Donald Trump just scored another major win over a legacy media outlet.

A federal appeals court has stepped in and hit the brakes on a lower court ruling that would have forced the White House to give Associated Press reporters access to high-level media events.

The 2-1 decision came down from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and temporarily blocks an earlier order from Judge Trevor McFadden, who had ruled back in April that the Trump administration must allow AP journalists into the Oval Office, onto Air Force One, and into other White House events while their lawsuit moved forward.

Read more: GLORIOUS: Kash Patel Punishes FBI Agents Who Knelt During George Floyd Protests

The AP had sued after being denied access, claiming the administration was retaliating because they refused to stop calling the Gulf of Mexico by its original name instead of the newly adopted “Gulf of America.” Their attorneys argued the move violated the First Amendment and amounted to censorship.

But legal counsel for President Trump made it clear: the president has full authority over which media outlets get access to the White House, especially when it comes to sensitive or high-security areas. They argued that McFadden’s ruling overstepped by stripping the president of that discretion.

“The Constitution does not prohibit the President from considering a journalist’s prior coverage in evaluating how much access he will grant that journalist,” an attorney for the administration said in a court filing.

Read more: JD Vance Humiliates NBC Host When She Tries Insulting Him on Live TV

“On April 16, the AP accused the Trump administration of defying the court order by continuing to exclude its journalists from some events and then limiting access to Trump for all news wires, including Reuters and Bloomberg. Reuters and the AP both issued statements denouncing the new policy, which puts wire services in a larger rotation with about 30 other newspaper and print outlets,” Reuters said in a report.

But the court said in its decision, “We grant in part the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal. The White House is likely to succeed on the merits because these restricted presidential spaces are not First Amendment fora opened for private speech and discussion.

“The White House therefore retains discretion to determine, including on the basis of viewpoint, which journalists will be admitted. Moreover, without a stay, the government will suffer irreparable harm because the injunction impinges on the President’s independence and control over his private workspaces,” the ruling continued.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression said in a press release that it believed the decision reached by the court was an incorrect one.

Read more: Do You Believe Jd Vance Will Be Our Next President?

“The D.C. Circuit’s flawed reasoning allows the White House to get away with blatant viewpoint discrimination against media outlets it doesn’t like. Even more troubling, the court downplays First Amendment protections for newsgathering, troublingly claiming that ‘newsgathering is not itself a communicative activity,’” it said in a post on X.

“If you’re scratching your head at that one, you’re not alone. The district court’s initial ruling got it right: The White House does not have to grant press access to everyone, but once it opens its doors to some journalists, it cannot exclude others simply because it doesn’t like their views or reporting,” the organization said.

“We encourage the Associated Press to keep fighting to vindicate not only its own First Amendment rights, but those of every media outlet,” it said.

Back in February, Trump made it clear he’d only consider lifting the ban if the AP agreed to start calling it the “Gulf of America” in their stylebook.

“We’re going to keep them out until such time that they agree that it’s the Gulf of America,” he said to reporters.

Read more: Pelosi Blasts Trump, Republicans Over Discussion Of Dem Party Future

“I do think that some of the phrases they want to use are ridiculous, and I think, frankly, they’ve become obsolete,” he said.