Breaking news

CNN, MS NOW and Politico filed a lawsuit in federal court in Washington seeking to restore White House access after their reporters were denied entry and had press credentials revoked following Trump's announcement banning the outlets over what he called "fake news" coverage. The suit, naming Trump, aide Steven Cheung, Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and Secret Service Director Sean Curran, argues the ban violates First Amendment press freedoms and 14th Amendment due-process rights, calling it unconstitutional "viewpoint discrimination." It cites the 1977 Sherrill v. Knight precedent barring arbitrary denial of press passes based on coverage content, as well as the earlier Jim Acosta case.

Trump denied targeting a free press, calling it instead an "assault on the FAKE News." The White House Correspondents' Association backed the outlets, warning the standard could be applied to any news organization. Separately, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox News said they would no longer supply camera crews for White House pool coverage after CNN was removed from pool duties, leaving no television crews traveling with Trump to the UN General Assembly.

CNN, MS NOW (formerly MSNBC) and Politico filed an emergency First Amendment lawsuit Monday in the DC District Court seeking to restore White House access after President Trump revoked their reporters' credentials over coverage he called "fake news." Reporters Betsy Klein (CNN), Akayla Gardner (MS NOW) and Cheyenne Haslett (Politico) had their press badges disabled Saturday and were denied entry; CNN also lost its pool coverage slot, meaning no television network traveled with Trump that day, an unprecedented gap.

The lawsuit names Trump, chief of staff Susie Wiles, spokesperson Steven Cheung and Secret Service chief Sean Curran, arguing the ban is unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination lacking due process, citing precedent involving Jim Acosta and the Associated Press. White House Correspondents' Association president Jacqui Heinrich and press-freedom advocates called the move "textbook viewpoint discrimination," warning the precedent could later be used against any outlet. Trump has said he might expand the ban further, and legal experts widely expect courts to strike it down.