Who: The White House and President Donald Trump revoked the press credentials of CNNMS NOW and Politico on September 19, 2026, blocking their journalists from the West Wing, the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room and other presidential spaces.
Why it matters: The action follows an announcement by the president criticizing certain media outlets for publishing what he called “fake news” and raises constitutional questions under the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s due-process protections. The removals prompted immediate operational disruptions at White House security checkpoints and a federal lawsuit seeking to restore credentials.
Context and precedent behind credential revocations
The revocations came weeks after an earlier administration initiative to create a continuous White House streaming channel. On April 1, 2026, the president announced via a public broadcast in the Cross Hall that three news organizations would be barred, and simultaneously launched a 24/7 streaming channel nicknamed “Trump TV” with the tagline “The Essentials Station.” The channel opened its archive with footage of a July 3 speech at Mt. Rushmore that the White House placed on the new stream and positioned as part of a strategy to centralize presidential communications. Observers compared the combination of credential restrictions and a proprietary stream to an effort to control information flows surrounding the presidency.
The current exclusions echo a long-running pattern of friction between the presidency and certain news organizations. In 2018 the administration attempted to exclude a senior correspondent, Jim Acosta and his press pass was temporarily seized after a confrontational press conference; a federal judge restored the pass on due-process grounds and the matter was later resolved. In 2025, the administration limited the Associated Press’s ability to travel with the president after a dispute over the administration’s preferred term “Gulf of America” for the Gulf of Mexico. Those precedents figure into legal arguments now because they established that credentialing systems created by the White House carry procedural obligations.
Details of the September revocations and operational effects
On September 18, 2026 the president posted a message criticizing coverage and asserting that “Media Outlets shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President.” The following day the White House deactivated press badges for CNN, MS NOW and Politico, immediately barring reporters from entering press facilities and presidential spaces. Journalists reported being turned away at security checkpoints, and specific correspondents named included MS NOW’s Akayla Gardner and Politico’s Cheyenne Haslett who said their credentials were deactivated by an action they described as beyond the authority of the officer who executed it.
The White House Correspondents’ Association led by President Jacqui Heinrich publicly denounced the move and said it violated the First Amendment. Commentators and scholars weighed in across the political spectrum; conservative law professor Jonathan Turley warned that the ban “would be an assault on long-honored principles of a free press.” Advocacy groups including the Committee to Protect Journalists and the Radio Television Digital News Association criticized the exclusions as an overreach, and several broadcasters announced limits on sharing White House audio and video pending resolution.
Litigation, legal framework and immediate court developments
On September 21, 2026 the three organizations filed a federal lawsuit seeking injunctive relief to restore their credentials while the case proceeds. The complaint asserts violations of the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment due-process clause, alleging the administration failed to provide written notice of the factual basis for denial and did not permit the outlets an opportunity to contest the action before the badges were deactivated.
Legal analysts pointed to the 1977 D.C. Circuit decision in Sherrill v. Knight which held that once an executive branch office establishes a credentialing system it cannot arbitrarily deny or withdraw passes without “narrow and specific standards,” including written notice and an opportunity to respond. The same judge who presided over the 2018 Acosta matter, which resulted in a temporary injunction restoring credentials, has been assigned to the current case, prompting predictions of a swift temporary reinstatement that would mirror past judicial responses focused on due process rather than an expansive First Amendment ruling.
As litigation proceeds, plaintiffs seek immediate restoration of access. The courtroom will be asked to reconcile longstanding press-access traditions with the administration’s asserted authority to exclude outlets it deems to disseminate false reporting, a dispute that has already prompted debate among lawmakers, media organizations and free-press advocates.
Last update: September 23, 2026
