Trump Appointee Signals Trump’s Press Ban Is Toast, Thanks Mostly To Trump

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly (a Trump appointee, a fact the president himself has been lamenting since the beginning) looks ready to keep his order blocking Trump’s ban on CNN, MS NOW, and Politico in place for the long haul. As reported by Politico, at a hearing today, Kelly made clear that the Justice Department’s effort to recast the ban as a national security measure isn’t getting very far.

“That’s an uphill climb,” Kelly said of the DOJ’s national security defense, noting Trump’s claim that his ban was based on his disapproval of the outlets’ coverage.

Well, about that.

Like so many DOJ lawyers before them, the attorneys defending this ban walked into court with a legal theory the president has been busy demolishing in public. Trump didn’t announce the ban by citing classified leaks, he announced it on Truth Social by complaining that the outlets “shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES.” When the case landed in Kelly’s courtroom, Trump grumbled that the judge was “sadly, appointed by ‘TRUMP’” and predicted a loss. National security came later, along with a whole lot of talking points, apparently once someone at Main Justice realized “I don’t like what they write about me” is not a winning brief.

Gibson Dunn’s Theodore Boutrous Jr., representing the outlets, urged Kelly to strike down the ban on a second ground too: it violates the news organizations’ First Amendment rights and is an effort to chill the free press. Boutrous argued that a recent interview Trump gave to Time magazine “amounts to a confession” that the president revoked the journalists’ press passes because he considered their stories too negative.

“That interview really is the coup de grace,” Boutrous said.

He also noted Attorney General Todd Blanche’s comments saying Trump banned the outlets from the White House over their “one-sided reporting.”

So, the president said it was about the coverage, the attorney general echoed that. The only people in America still insisting it’s about national security are the government lawyers paid to say so in court. Back in September, Boutrous called Trump the plaintiffs’ “lead witness,” and you know what, folks? That lead witness has not stopped testifying.

Then there’s due process, which is where the government’s case goes from shaky to something worse.

“That’s probably the biggest hurdle you all have,” Kelly told the government.

Justice Department lawyer Michael Velchik argued that the administration had, in fact, provided the outlets due process… after the ban went into effect. His evidence? Unsigned letters from the White House press office, delivered in the days after the lawsuit was filed, flagging a handful of stories the administration considered “misinformation” or “national security” risks. According to Velchik, the outlets “defaulted” by failing to respond.

That’s… not how any of this is supposed to work. Velchik also repeatedly attributed the letters to Trump himself, even though they were unsigned and Trump never mentioned them publicly. Boutrous called the whole after-the-fact effort a “sham process,” emphasizing that nothing suggests Trump signed off on the letters or even knew they existed.

Listen, Kelly already sent one Trump White House back to the drawing board over Jim Acosta’s press pass in 2018, and if the DOJ wants this sequel to end differently, maybe it should start by asking its client to stop giving interviews.

Earlier: Trump Banned Three News Outlets And Handed Gibson Dunn A Sequel It Already Knows How To Win
The White House Has A Whole Lot Of Talking Points And Not A Lot Of Case Law