Special Poll
The White House urged a judge on Monday to uphold its decision to bar the Associated Press (AP) from certain press events, arguing in a new court filing that access to the president is discretionary and not a constitutional right.
The filing was submitted just hours before a scheduled hearing, stating that while the AP has historically been granted special media access to the president, this does not mean that such privileges are “constitutionally guaranteed in perpetuity.”
According to the White House, the case centers on the administration’s right to control press access. The filing states, “This case is about the Associated Press losing special media access to the President—a quintessentially discretionary presidential choice that infringes no constitutional right.” It further argues that past presidents have provided AP with special access, but this does not establish a legal obligation to continue doing so.
The Associated Press lawsuit, filed last week in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, names White House deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich, press secretary Karoline Leavitt, and chief of staff Susie Wiles as defendants. The AP claims the administration violated its First Amendment rights by restricting its reporters from Oval Office meetings and Air Force One press pools after the news outlet continued to use the term “Gulf of Mexico” instead of Trump’s preferred “Gulf of America.”
The move is seen as part of a broader White House effort to influence media language and coverage, particularly through the AP’s widely used style guide, which shapes how mainstream news outlets report on key issues. Republicans argue that AP has become biased toward the left, while the AP maintains that its style guide is neutral and continually updated to ensure accuracy.
The White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA), a press group with nearly 800 members, has filed an amicus brief in support of the AP. The WHCA warns that the administration’s actions set a dangerous precedent that could discourage critical reporting and distort public news coverage.
The brief also underscores the importance of the independent press pool system, which rotates reporters from major news organizations to cover the president’s movements and decisions. The WHCA describes it as the “first draft of history”, capturing events of both domestic and global significance.
With legal arguments now unfolding, the case could set an important precedent on how much control a sitting president has over press access—and whether media organizations can be penalized for not conforming to White House messaging.