White House allows blocked reporters in after judge lifts Trump ban

The judge, whom Trump appointed in 2017, said the ban appeared to clearly violate two federal appeals court rulings that require advance notice and an opportunity to be heard to journalists whose White House press passes are targeted for revocation.

Kelly said he was bound to follow the rulings in those cases, “full stop,” which were issued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Trump did not warn the outlets he wanted to bar them before imposing his ban. The Justice Department issued explanations for the ban to the outlets on Tuesday, a day after they sued to block the ban.

Kelly, in his ruling, also said he was “skeptical” of the Justice Department’s claims that Trump was actually motivated by a need to safeguard national security in revoking the outlets’ access.

“Nothing in the record that predates this suit suggests that the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes was motivated by national security concerns,” Kelly wrote.

“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.”

Kelly also said that “nothing” in the letters to the outlets citing their purported endangering of national security with their reports suggests an urgent need to ban them.

“Indeed, some of the reporting identified by Defendants in the letters to Plaintiffs stretches back months or years,” Kelly wrote.

“Simply put — the record lacks factual support for Defendants’ contention that the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes will in fact protect national security or that national security will be endangered if the Court orders their passes reinstated while this litigation proceeds,” the judge wrote.

Kelly declined to grant a request by the Justice Department to delay the temporary restraining order against Trump’s ban from taking effect immediately.

And Kelly noted that “temporary restraining orders are generally unappealable.”

The White House didn’t immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment on the ruling.

A lawyer for the outlets, Theodore Boutrous Jr., welcomed Kelly’s ruling order, calling it “a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law.”

“We greatly appreciate the court’s swift action,” Boutrous said in a statement.

The White House, when asked for comment about the order Thursday, replied with a link to the court filing in which its director of operations notified Kelly about the measures the White House had taken to restore the press credentials of the outlets.

On Thursday, Kelly, in an order, told the outlets to file any motion seeking a preliminary injunction, which would continue to prevent the White House from implementing Trump’s ban while their lawsuit continues, by Sept. 28.

Kelly, who told the defendants in the lawsuit to respond to such a motion by Oct. 2, said in his order, “The Court will set a hearing at a later date but intends to rule expeditiously on the motion for a preliminary injunction.”

Disclosure: CNBC and MS NOW are divisions of Versant Media.

Article source: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/24/judge-lifts-trumps-white-house-ban-on-cnn-ms-now-and-politico.html