A federal judge has ruled in favor of the Associated Press, ordering the Trump administration to restore the news organization’s access to key White House areas after it was banned for refusing to adopt the term “Gulf of America” in its reporting a phrase President Trump had demanded be used in place of “Gulf of Mexico.”
Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, issued a pointed rebuke to the administration’s decision, affirming that the First Amendment protects against viewpoint-based discrimination. He ordered the White House to once again allow AP reporters into limited-access press spaces, including the Oval Office, Air Force One, and other areas typically open to members of the press pool.
While the judge clarified that the ruling doesn’t force the administration to grant access to every journalist or to answer any specific questions, he made it clear that once the government allows some reporters in, it can’t exclude others based on editorial disagreement.
“The Constitution requires no less,” McFadden wrote. “If the Government opens its doors to some journalists be it to the Oval Office, the East Room, or elsewhere it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints.”
The AP had sued three senior Trump officials after its reporters were banned earlier this year for refusing to update its widely followed stylebook to reflect Trump’s controversial renaming of the Gulf of Mexico. The administration argued that using “Gulf of America” was a matter of national pride and alignment with new executive policies, but media organizations across the spectrum rejected the demand as politically motivated and factually incorrect.
Though McFadden temporarily stayed his own order until April 13, allowing time for the administration to appeal, the ruling marks a significant legal victory for the press and a direct setback for Trump’s efforts to control media narratives. If a higher court doesn’t intervene, the ruling will go into full effect next month.
The case has drawn national attention as it highlights ongoing tensions between the press and the Trump administration, which has frequently clashed with journalists and restricted access for outlets it deems unfriendly.
Media watchdog groups hailed the decision as a landmark affirmation of press freedom. First Amendment advocates argue that the Trump administration’s effort to penalize a news outlet over its editorial choices represents a dangerous precedent, and the court’s ruling sends a strong message that such actions won’t be tolerated under U.S. law.
As the administration considers its next move, critics are already questioning whether President Trump’s aggressive posture toward the media is beginning to backfire, both legally and politically. In this latest skirmish, the media has clearly won and the courts have sided with the Constitution over the commander-in-chief.