Three news organizations that sued the White House after President Donald Trump banned them from the grounds have amended their lawsuit. They are now asking a federal judge to permanently restore their access, not just to the White House but to other areas including the Oval Office and Air Force One.

The amended complaint filed by the news outlets — MS NOW, CNN and Politico — comes two weeks after U.S. Judge Timothy Kelly indefinitely reversed Trump’s ban and restored their access to the White House. Since that ruling, the Trump administration has continued to bar reporters from those three news outlets from the pool, which guarantees coverage of the president at all times.

The White House press pool was formed as part of a long-standing agreement between the White House and news organizations in which a small group of journalists agrees to cover the president — often traveling with him — on behalf of the entire press corps. On the days the White House has banned CNN and Politico from serving in the pool, other outlets have declined to fill in for them in solidarity.

Lawyers for the three news outlets argued the Trump administration’s restrictions surrounding pool coverage also violate both the First Amendment and the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. They are asking Kelly to restore access to all three outlets as it existed before the ban was implemented for all presidential events designated for pool coverage.

“These exclusions reflect an unstated policy to carry out the President’s directive to take his viewpoint-discriminatory and retaliatory ban ‘as far as you can,’’” they wrote in the amended lawsuit.

They alleged that the president has explicitly said he wants to limit Oval Office access to news organizations that cover him unfavorably, pointing specifically to a White House statement that said the banned news organizations have “no place demanding a spot in the President’s Oval Office.”

The lawyers also specifically argued that the White House’s interference with CNN’s ability to perform its role as the primary television network for pool duty violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. CNN is in a unique position because it is the only one of the three affected organizations that serves in the primary television network pool — the group of five networks that rotate to offer real-time television coverage of the president.

“For 45 years, CNN has been one of the five networks that staff, equip, and bear the costs associated with the primary network television pool upon which the American public (and the White House itself) relies for real-time coverage of the President in the Oval Office, aboard Air Force One and at the many other presidential events that due to size and other constraints simply cannot accommodate all members of the press corps,” the complaint says.

The lawyers pointed to the significant costs CNN incurs to perform its pool duties, including crews, equipment, staffing and travel.

“These substantial investments — which were made in reliance on the White House’s longstanding practice of honoring pool assignments — entitle CNN to continue to fully perform its pool duties when designated,” the lawyers wrote. “Defendants have deprived CNN of its liberty and property interests by interfering with CNN’s ability to perform those duties with no notice, no standards, and no opportunity to be heard.”

Neither the White House nor the Justice Department immediately responded to MS NOW’s request for comment.

Without the pool — particularly without CNN’s cameras — several of Trump’s recent events have not been covered in the usual way. CNN and Politico were both scheduled to serve as the pool for Trump’s trip to Mississippi on Monday. Once again, the White House barred them from traveling on Air Force One, and the secondary pool reporter — for a print, not TV, organization — had to step in to provide written updates of the trip.

The Air Force One trips also provide Americans coverage of critical historic events, the lawyers argued, pointing specifically to coverage of John F. Kennedy’s assassination and of George W. Bush during the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Lawyers for MS NOW, CNN and Politico argued that restrictions on pool access affect not only the media organizations in question but also the public’s access to coverage of the president.

The issue of pool restrictions has already arisen in the case through court filings and arguments, but it has not been a part of the question directly before the judge. The first phase of this case focused primarily on access to the White House itself as it existed before Trump’s ban. Until now, the lawsuit did not directly address pool access, but lawyers had made the argument that journalists need White House credentials to participate in the pool.

Kelly has already ruled that the president’s ban likely violates the First Amendment, finding it was both retaliatory and viewpoint discrimination, as well as the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.

“The record is clear that President Trump made the decision at issue,” Kelly wrote. “And his announcement of the ban and later remarks explaining the reason for it makes this a straightforward conclusion: President Trump likely banned Plaintiffs from the White House because he believes that their reporting is generally inaccurate and biased against him.”

In the wake of the ruling, the Trump administration appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, but that appeal remains pending.

Kelly’s ruling was somewhat of a foregone conclusion, because the D.C. Circuit has held that the White House may not arbitrarily deny a journalist a press credential since press access to the White House is protected by the First Amendment and may not be revoked without due process.

The issue of pool access is less settled, though.

Last year, the D.C. Circuit allowed Trump to block The Associated Press from covering the president in certain spaces, at least for now. That order found it was legal for Trump to restrict access to a news organization in invite-only spaces, like the Oval Office or Air Force One. That ruling paused a lower court’s ruling that had sided with the AP to affirm their access.

But that appellate ruling was only a pause in a lower court’s ruling, which means it is not binding legal precedent. That case remains pending, and there has been no final ruling on the merits.

Lawyers for MS NOW, CNN and Politico also argued that the facts have developed since the D.C. Circuit found that access could be restricted. They said Trump has held the majority of his press availability in spaces like the Oval Office and Air Force One, and because of that, those spaces cannot be restricted to some outlets under the First Amendment.

“In 2025, President Trump made two appearances in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room where he fielded a total of approximately 51 questions,” they wrote. “By contrast, he held 95 press events in the Oval office where he fielded no fewer than 1,991 questions. On Air Force One and on the tarmac, the President made himself available to the press 70 times and fielded no fewer than 1,186 questions.”

“While the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room remains a critical forum for reporters to gather and report the news, of the nearly 5,000 questions the President has entertained from reporters in these traditional areas, 97% were either in the Oval Office or in connection with his travel aboard Air Force One,” they added.

These statistics, they argued, make pool access not only critical but guaranteed under the First Amendment.

The post MS NOW, CNN and Politico amend lawsuit, seeking to restore access to Oval Office and Air Force One appeared first on MS NOW.

From MS Now.