President Donald Trump said he expects the White House press-access dispute involving CNN, Politico and MS NOW to reach an appeals court after the case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, who previously ruled against his administration in a similar dispute.

By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.

President Donald Trump said Monday that his administration is likely headed for an appeal in the legal fight over its decision to bar CNN, Politico and MS NOW from the White House, after the three news organizations’ lawsuit was assigned to a federal judge Trump appointed during his first term.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly will oversee the case filed Monday by the three outlets, which argue that revoking their journalists’ White House access because of the administration’s objections to their reporting violates the First Amendment and constitutional due-process protections.

Trump reacted to the assignment by pointing to Kelly’s role in an earlier White House credential dispute involving former CNN correspondent Jim Acosta.

“They have drawn a great Judge, for them, a man who ruled in favor of Jim Acosta, who now seems to have disappeared from the Planet. The Judge’s name is Tim Kelly, and he was, sadly, appointed by ‘TRUMP.'” Trump wrote Monday on Truth Social.

“In other words, almost without question and, as usual, we’ll go for appeal because Fake News people and publications that only write negatively, and who violate our National Security by writing false and defamatory stories with unknown ‘sources,’ shouldn’t be allowed access to the most important Office anywhere in the World.”

Trump’s comments represented his own expectation about how the case may proceed rather than a judicial indication of how Kelly will rule.

CNN, Politico and MS NOW filed their lawsuit after the White House revoked their journalists’ credentials and barred them from White House grounds. The three organizations are asking the federal court in Washington to restore their access while the broader constitutional challenge proceeds.

Trump announced the ban Friday, accusing the three organizations of publishing “fake news.” Reporters from the outlets were subsequently turned away from the White House after their credentials were deactivated.

The lawsuit argues that the administration excluded the organizations because officials objected to the content of their coverage, which the plaintiffs contend amounts to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.

The White House has rejected that argument.

“White House access is a privilege — not a right,” the administration said in response to the lawsuit.

Trump likewise maintains that the dispute concerns what he considers inaccurate and damaging reporting rather than freedom of the press.

“Why should I have to give “access” to such people? Perhaps Judge Kelly could explain that! In any event, I have an obligation to fight for the Success and Safety of our Country,” Trump added.

The case puts Kelly in the middle of another dispute between Trump and CNN nearly eight years after he handled the Acosta litigation.

In November 2018, the first Trump administration suspended Acosta’s White House press credential following a contentious exchange between the reporter and Trump during a news conference.

CNN sued, and Kelly ordered the administration to temporarily restore Acosta’s credential. The ruling focused substantially on due-process concerns surrounding how the White House had revoked the pass rather than establishing an unrestricted constitutional right for every journalist to enter all presidential spaces.

The White House later restored Acosta’s credential and established formal rules governing press conferences.

That history has now become part of Trump’s criticism of the judge assigned to the latest case.

Kelly was nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Trump in 2017 and confirmed by the Senate that September.

The present dispute is broader in some respects than the Acosta case because the administration has barred three entire news organizations rather than suspending the credential of a single reporter.

CNN senior White House reporter Betsy Klein, MS NOW reporter Akayla Gardner and Politico reporter Cheyenne Haslett were among the journalists denied access after Trump’s order took effect.

The ban has also affected the White House television pool.

CNN had been scheduled to provide pool coverage of Trump on Monday but was prevented from carrying out the assignment. ABC, CBS, Fox News, NBC and CNN subsequently suspended their television pool duties rather than substitute another network for CNN.

The presidential pool is used when space or security limitations prevent the entire White House press corps from attending an event. A smaller group of journalists attends on behalf of the broader press corps and distributes reporting, photographs and video to other organizations.

The three plaintiffs contend their exclusion goes beyond the government’s legitimate authority to manage access to restricted presidential spaces.

Their case asks the court to distinguish between security or logistical restrictions and a decision to deny otherwise qualified journalists access because officials object to their reporting.

The administration has maintained that presidential access is discretionary and that it should not be required to provide access to organizations Trump believes have published false or defamatory information.

The legal dispute follows another recent press-access fight involving The Associated Press.

In that case, the Trump administration restricted AP access to certain presidential events after the organization continued using “Gulf of Mexico” in its reporting while also acknowledging Trump’s decision to rename the body of water the “Gulf of America.”

A federal appeals court later allowed restrictions involving limited-access spaces such as the Oval Office and Air Force One to remain in effect while the litigation continued. The court nevertheless distinguished those restricted spaces from areas generally open to credentialed White House journalists.

CNN, Politico and MS NOW are seeking emergency relief restoring their journalists’ credentials as their lawsuit proceeds.

Trump, meanwhile, has already indicated that if Kelly rules against the administration, he expects the White House to challenge that decision in a higher court.

The dispute therefore sets up another federal court examination of how the First Amendment applies when a president objects to a news organization’s coverage and responds by restricting its physical access to the White House.

Original article