# Judge orders Trump to restore banned media access

> A federal judge blocked Trump's ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, saying it likely violated their constitutional rights.
- Title: Judge orders Trump to restore banned media access · TIME
- Summary: A federal judge blocked Trump's ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, saying it likely violated their constitutional rights. Courts have consistently ruled that…
- Keywords: trump administration, white house press ban, cnn, ms now, politico, judge timothy kelly, first amendment, due process, press freedom, jim acosta, media solidarity, Judge
- Source: TIME — https://time.com/article/2026/09/24/judge-overturns-trump-white-house-media-ban-temporary-order-appeal
- Author: Callum Sutherland
- Published: 2026-09-24T12:18:51+00:00
- Read time: 2 min
- Topics: trump administration, white house press ban, cnn, ms now, politico, judge timothy kelly, first amendment, due process, press freedom, jim acosta, media solidarity
## Judge blocks Trump's media ban
Federal Judge Timothy Kelly issued a temporary restraining order Thursday, saying Trump's ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico likely violated their constitutional rights to due process.
## Reporters turned away that morning
Journalists from the three outlets were blocked from entering the White House Thursday morning, prompting an emergency court filing accusing the administration of violating the judge's order.
## Access restored by afternoon
After Judge Kelly gave the White House until 12:30 p.m. to respond, the administration began reinstating press badges at 7:25 a.m., and the three outlets' reporters were allowed back in.
## Judge rejects national security claim
Kelly found no evidence the ban was about security, noting Trump announced it based on alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity in reporting, not national security concerns.

> Certainly, that is not what President Trump said when he announced that he was 'banning' plaintiffs from the White House, instead, he focused on the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity of plaintiffs' reporting.
## Due process violation found
The judge determined the outlets were likely to succeed in showing their hard passes were revoked without constitutionally adequate due process, a Fifth Amendment protection.
## Trump vows to appeal the ruling
Trump dismissed the legal challenge and indicated he regretted appointing Kelly, vowing to fight any block on his ban and calling the outlets fake news that violate national security.

> 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 [Oval Office].
## What happens in the next 14 days
The temporary restraining order lasts 14 days while the court schedules expedited briefing on a preliminary injunction, allowing both sides to submit further evidence for Kelly to consider.
## Legal precedent favors the outlets
Courts have already established that the government cannot exclude reporters based on viewpoint or take away press passes without due process and a hearing opportunity, a principle from the Jim Acosta case.

> The government can't exclude reporters based on viewpoint, and cannot take away a press pass without due process, without some sort of hearing opportunity to be heard, an explanation of what it is that they supposedly did wrong, what rules they violated.
## Media outlets show rare unity
ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, and NBC declined to replace CNN's pool coverage at the UN General Assembly, and 49 media organizations filed a legal brief supporting the three banned outlets.

> The public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government. No Administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting.
## Supreme Court could change the outcome
While the D.C. Circuit is likely to reject Trump's appeal based on existing precedent, the Supreme Court could take a broader view that the government can control access to its property.
## Key takeaway

Courts have consistently ruled that the government cannot revoke press credentials based on viewpoint without due process, a principle established in the Jim Acosta case and now reinforced.