CNN, Politico and MS NOW to sue Trump over White House ban

September 21, 2026 at 03:57 PM2 min

This digest was compiled by AI from multiple sources — links to the originals are below.

CNN, Politico and MS NOW said on Monday they will sue the Trump administration after the White House revoked their journalists' credentials. The outlets said their reporters were denied access and had badges seized on Saturday, a day after President Donald Trump announced the ban. The joint statement said the lawsuit aims to protect First Amendment rights and prevent government control over press reporting.

Key Facts

President Donald Trump announced the ban on Friday, September 18, accusing CNN, Politico and MS NOW of writing "fiction or lies" about his administration.
On Saturday, September 19, reporters from the three outlets were denied access to the White House complex and had their badges seized or deactivated.
The joint statement on Monday said the outlets are pursuing legal action to protect First Amendment rights and the principle that the government does not decide what the press reports or publishes.
The First Amendment forbids the government from abridging freedom of the press, which courts have interpreted as preventing content-based discrimination against media.

The White House Ban

President Donald Trump announced the ban on Friday, September 18, accusing CNN, Politico and MS NOW of writing "fiction or lies" about his administration. The next day, reporters from the three outlets were denied access to the White House complex and had their badges seized or deactivated. The outlets said the White House revoked their journalists' credentials without notice or process because it objected to their reporting.

Legal Action and First Amendment

In a joint statement on Monday, CNN, Politico and MS NOW said they are pursuing legal action to protect their First Amendment rights and defend the principle that the government does not decide what the press reports or publishes. The First Amendment forbids the government from abridging freedom of the press, language that courts have traditionally interpreted as preventing content-based discrimination against media. The outlets stated that left unchallenged, the ban threatens press freedom and the public's right to independent journalism free from government interference.