Trump Loyalist Judge Smacks Down Trump Admin Over Blocking The AP
from the bringing-free-speech-back dept
For someone who claims he single-handedly “brought free speech back,” Donald Trump sure spends a lot of time trying to silence speech he doesn’t like. His latest attempt just got demolished by one of his own hand-picked judges, as Judge Trevor McFadden ruled against the administration for its blatantly retaliatory ban of Associated Press reporters who refused to use Trump’s preferred proper nouns for the Gulf of Mexico.
Yes, yes, we know: the Trump administration claims that any judge ruling against the administration is a “far leftist radical Marxist who dreams of Mao” or whatever. But they’re going to have a wee bit of trouble making that argument with McFadden.
He isn’t just a Trump-appointed judge (he is), but he’s one of the Trumpiest judges on the bench, who has repeatedly ruled in ways supportive of Trump. When Trump tried to divert billions of dollars to his stupid Mexican wall project, Congress sued to block him, and McFadden ruled that Congress lacked standing (later overturned). In other words, if anyone was going to rule in favor of the White House here, it was likely Judge McFadden. Instead, he finds for the AP, and rather easily too. He notes, obviously, that the White House has the power to block access, but if it is opening up sessions to the media, it can’t block access on the basis of the media org’s expression:
So while the AP does not have a constitutional right to enter the Oval Office, it does have a right to not be excluded because of its viewpoint. And the AP says that is exactly what is happening….
The Court agrees. Indeed, the Government has been brazen about this. Several high-ranking officials have repeatedly said that they are restricting the AP’s access precisely because of the organization’s viewpoint. See supra Section I.A. Government counsel admitted that the AP was not being chosen for access, despite its “eligibility,” because of its viewpoint…. The Government offers no other plausible explanation for its treatment of the AP. The Constitution forbids viewpoint discrimination, even in a nonpublic forum like the Oval Office.
Judge McFadden goes on to point out that the cases the White House raises in response are obviously inapplicable, and the argument in favor of the AP being discriminated against for its speech is so obvious it’s barely worth highlighting.
In sum, precedent is unequivocal that the press does not enjoy any standalone right of access to highly restricted government locations like the Oval Office. Instead, forum analysis applies because the Government has chosen to open the Oval Office to some reporters for newsgathering. Under forum analysis, the Oval Office is a nonpublic forum, so the Government enjoys wide latitude on its restrictions, if they are viewpoint neutral. The AP presented evidence that the Government has discriminated against it based on its viewpoint, a claim the Government all but concedes. The AP is thus likely to succeed on its claim that its exclusion from eligibility to access the Oval Office violates its First Amendment rights.
The White House will likely appeal, though it’s hard to imagine it being successful (though, these days the Roberts Court would probably dream up some nonsense procedural argument for why Trump can do what he wants, while insisting it’s just ruling narrowly and people shouldn’t read anything more into the ruling).
What’s particularly notable here is how clearly McFadden lays out the constitutional principle at stake: the government can limit press access, but it cannot do so based on what reporters say or how they say it.
So the next time Trump or his supporters claim he’s a champion of free speech while simultaneously trying to punish media outlets for their editorial choices, remember: even his own hand-picked judges recognize this for what it is — unconstitutional censorship dressed up as “free speech advocacy.”
Filed Under: 1st amendment, donald trump, press pool, trevor mcfadden, viewpoint discrimination
Companies: associated press


Comments on “Trump Loyalist Judge Smacks Down Trump Admin Over Blocking The AP”
So Donald just have to decide that AP is too big and he wants smaller outlets.
Also, getting access to the press pool is supervised by the WHCA, that Donald can dissolve at any time (even it has no control over it).
That’s a way for McFadden to telling to his old buddy what to do.
When the 3 branches, DO something
NOW to work on the Congress.
Do you think they have Upset/pissed off the corps enough?
Re:
Congress is working on killing off section 230, they’re suffocating the anti-trump movement in its crib.
Lawmakers all over the world are killing the internet and no one is stopping them right now.
Re: Re: Shut the fuck up
Hey Koby Jr. next time you feel like making a section 230 post please reread the subject of this post.
Re: Re:
All the people working against this just said, “Fuck you, buddy, what are you doing?”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
The supreme court will throw this out, saying it should have been filed and argued in DC, because that is where the white house is located. Additionally, as a corporation and news outlet, the AP does not have standing.
Re:
That’s not how anything works. Neither of your sentences make any sense from a legal standpoint.
Re:
Shut up censorship nazi.
Re:
And when they refile in DC, SCOTUS will tell them they need to refile in El Salvador.
The procedural stuff is used to rule in favor of tyranny while hiding behind what is in fact legal nonsense that non-lawyers aren’t familiar with.
Re: Re:
They are blatant enough now, that even non-lawyers can see the shit being smeared on the walls by SCROTUS.
Re: Re:
We lost the list of those we sent down there. So we cant do anything.
Re: Re: Re:
Check the news reports, which have the names of every person victimized by this policy, and shut up making excuses, MAGAt.
Re: Re: Re:2
I think it was sarcasm, which needed a /s tag…
Re: Re: Re:2
It was a bitter joke about how the fascists are getting away with kidnapping innocent people in the dumbest way possible.
They are literally just saying that, and the other U.S. authorities are just throwing up their hands and exclaiming, “Well we tried everything! We can’t do anything to stop them.”
I think you severely underestimate MAGA voters’ appetites for cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy.
SCROTUS just used the Shadow docket to proudly declare that due process has been eliminated in the US, so the orange Shitstain can deport whomever to a foreign prison.
Does anyone really think Robert’s cabal of shysters, assholes, bigots and 2nd assholes will do anything other than rubberstamp Mango’s latest criminality, while the 2-3 sane people write meaningless dissents?