By The Editorial Board
On Sept. 18, President Donald Trump posted a message on Truth Social that turned the Washington journalism world on its head — and threatens the freedom of the press outlined in the U.S. Constitution.
“Effective immediately,” the Truth Social post says, “I am banning Fake News CNN, MSNOW (…), and Politico (…) from the White House as a result of their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!”
Trump also cautioned against other news outlets publishing “FICTION and LIES” about him, declaring that other “fake news media outlets” would follow this ban.
Despite this admonishment, other major news networks — including ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox News — stalled their shared coverage of the White House and the President in solidarity.
These news organizations are part of the White House “press pool,” a rotating group of news organizations whose reporting is accessible to the public.
The White House Correspondents’ Association President Jacqui Heinrich posted a response Sept. 19 on X that reads, “Today’s action revoking access for journalists (…) violates the First Amendment.”
Here is the larger issue behind this ban: restricting a person, organization or media outlet simply because they disagree with the president is unconstitutional.
This fight against the press is not a one-off issue.
Presidents Thomas Jefferson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Richard Nixon and George W. Bush have all historically had a strained relationship with news outlets.
While this issue has persisted through time, it has grown worse over the past year. We have seen the President call reporters “piggy,” “stupid,” “a terrible reporter” and “dumb person.”
General respect for the press has declined, and it now threatens to infringe our constitutional rights.
U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche spoke to ABC News Sunday and claimed that “[media outlets] being in the White House is a privilege, not a right.”
However, the Constitution states that Congress cannot make any law prohibiting the free exercise of the press. As Americans, we have a right to knowledge about our government and global events.
While a law was not passed and a Washington D.C. federal judge blocked the ban issued by Trump to restore press access to the prohibited outlets, this is still cause for concern.
When bans like this are issued — especially because of a personal affront to what is being reported — we lose this right, which is being framed as a privilege by the current administration.
By Sept. 21, CNN, MSNOW and Politico had filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration.
In a brief submitted by a coalition of 49 media organizations, the group argues that “stripping journalists and news outlets of their rights because of perceived editorial viewpoint violates decades of Supreme Court jurisprudence and is impermissible in any type of forum, including the White House.”
Ted Boutrous, a lawyer representing the media companies, told CNN, “This is a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law. We greatly appreciate the court’s swift action.”
This is a serious issue to Americans and to democracy. Without a free press, we do not have a democracy.
In the unprinted preface to George Orwell’s “Animal Farm,” Orwell wrote, “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
If we have a government that is controlling what people know, who can speak and how facts can be shared, we lose the values that America was founded on.
As student journalists, the Editorial Board sees the freedom of the press as important and non-negotiable to a well-functioning democracy. If we do not speak up when this is threatened, we risk being complacent in setting a dangerous precedent, and our rights are left on the line.
