TRUMP appointed judge makes WH reinstate ACOSTA WH pass: Reason for why removed so "shrouded in mystery" no one could tell me why it was removed.

Jul 2015
33,053
24,407
Florida
#1
Trump-appointed judge forces White House to reinstate press pass of CNN’s Jim Acosta


TRAVIS GETTYS
16 NOV 2018 AT 10:29 ET


Jim Acosta (CNN/screen grab)

A federal judge delivered a blow to the White House in a lawsuit filed by CNN over a revoked press pass for reporter Jim Acosta.

Judge Timothy Kelly found Friday morning that the U.S. government must give Acosta due process before revoking his press pass — which he ordered must be reinstated.

"I will order defendants immediately restore Mr. Acosta's hard pass." Judge rules in favor of CNN in this initial proceeding and White House MUST restore @Acosta press pass IMMEDIATELY.​

The judge said the White House’s written arguments for banning the reporter were “hardly sufficient to satisfy” Acosta’s Fifth Amendment right to due process.

He noted that Sarah Huckabee Sanders offered two differing justifications for revoking the “hard pass” credentials from Acosta.

Kelly agreed with the White House that there was no First Amendment right to access the press briefing room, and he said Sanders and President Donald Trump were under no obligation to call on him.

The judge said the White House did not provide due process to Acosta, and he said the process was “so shrouded in mystery that the government could not tell me … who made the decision.”

 
Last edited:

the watchman

Former Staff
Jul 2011
92,760
58,782
becoming more and more
#2
wait. The judge ruled there's no first admendment right to access to the WH press briefing room?
That's not consistent with previous rulings.
 

the watchman

Former Staff
Jul 2011
92,760
58,782
becoming more and more
#5
so...this is what I found.


Rather, we are presented with a situation where the White House has voluntarily decided to establish press facilities for correspondents who need to report therefrom. These press facilities are perceived as being open to all bona fide19 Washington-based journalists, whereas most of the White House itself, and press facilities in particular, have not been made available to the general public. White House press facilities having been made publicly available as a source of information for newsmen,20 the protection afforded newsgathering under the first amendment guarantee of freedom of the press, see Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 681, 707, 92 S.Ct. 2646, 33 L.Ed.2d 626 (1972); Pell v. Procunier, 417 U.S. 817, 829-35, 94 S.Ct. 2800, 41 L.Ed.2d 495 (1974), requires that this access not be denied arbitrarily or for less than compelling reasons. See Southeastern Promotions v. Conrad, 420 U.S. 546, 95 S.Ct. 1239, 43 L.Ed.2d 448 (1975); Lovell v. Griffin, 303 U.S. 444, 58 S.Ct. 666, 82 L.Ed. 949 (1938). Not only newsmen and the publications for which they write, but also the public at large have an interest protected by the first amendment in assuring that restrictions on newsgathering be no more arduous than necessary, and that individual newsmen not be arbitrarily excluded from sources of information. See Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469, 491-92, 95 S.Ct. 1029, 43 L.Ed.2d 328 (1975); Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616, 630, 40 S.Ct. 17, 63 L.Ed. 1173 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); United States v. Associated Press, 52 F.Supp. 362, 372 (S.D.N.Y.1943) ("right conclusions are more likely to be gathered out of a multitude of tongues, than through any kind of authoritative selection") (L. Hand, J.)
569 F2d 124 Sherrill v. H Knight | OpenJurist

It looks to me like the court ruled that there IS a first amendment right to access to the WH briefing room.
Could be reading this wrong though.

What do you think?
 
Jun 2014
48,537
48,989
United States
#6
so...this is what I found.


569 F2d 124 Sherrill v. H Knight | OpenJurist

It looks to me like the court ruled that there IS a first amendment right to access to the WH briefing room.
Could be reading this wrong though.

What do you think?

I don't think that you or I could simply walk into the WH briefing room without a press pass. Were there a 1st Amendment right for any citizen to be there, then we could.

Obviously, the granting of a WH press pass is a privilege, rather than a right, but that in no way implies that those who have press passes may be rejected without due process.