MS NOW journalists denied entry to White House following Trump media ban

President Donald Trump’s decision to ban MS NOW, CNN, and Politico from the White House triggered immediate backlash, with journalists from the first two outlets reporting being denied entry on September 19, 2026, following his Friday announcement. The move, framed by Trump as a response to “fake news,” has intensified debates over press freedom and the limits of executive authority over media access.

On Friday, Trump declared on his social media platform, Truth Social, that he was “banning Fake News CNN, MSNOW, and Politico from the White House as a result of their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!” He later reiterated the claim during a press availability, stating, “You get so tired of reading and seeing fake news. When you look at CNN, it’s just fake. That’s why their ratings are no good.” The president also accused MS NOW of being “fake news” and referenced its previous name, MSNBC, citing “lack of viewership and credibility,” according to *Atlanta Black Star*.

MS NOW journalists reported being denied entry to the White House grounds on Saturday. Akayla Gardner, the network’s White House correspondent, said she was turned away after her press badge was disabled by Secret Service officers. A producer was allowed to enter, but a photographer’s badge was also confiscated. “The decision ‘was above him,’ an officer told me,” Gardner said on air, according to reports. CNN’s Betsy Klein was also denied access, with her press pass seized, according to *The Independent*. Politico’s reporter Cheyenne Haslett had her press pass confiscated by Secret Service agents, as confirmed by the outlet’s global editor-in-chief, Jonathan Greenberger, in an internal email.

The White House Correspondents’ Association condemned the move, stating, “The constitution protects the freedom of the press from government interference. That protection does not depend on whether the president likes a news organization’s coverage.” *BBC News* reported that CNN and Politico both issued statements affirming their right to cover the administration, with CNN warning that the ban could violate the law. MS NOW emphasized its commitment to defending “the essential role of independent journalism in our democracy.”

Legal experts and press freedom organizations have criticized the ban as a potential violation of the First Amendment, which guarantees the right to free speech and a free press. A 1977 court ruling, *Sherill v. Knight*, established that “bona fide journalists” cannot be excluded from White House press facilities unless they pose a physical threat to the president or their family. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press called the ban “flatly unconstitutional,” arguing that once the White House provides access to journalists, it cannot deny that access based on the content of their reporting.

Trump’s administration has a history of restricting media access. In 2025, the Associated Press was barred from certain White House events after refusing to use the name “Gulf of America” instead of “Gulf of Mexico.” The AP filed a lawsuit, which remains unresolved. The president has also taken legal action against other outlets, including *The New York Times*, *The Wall Street Journal*, and the BBC. He has also threatened to revoke other networks’ FCC operating licenses.

During a press availability, Trump interrupted a reporter mid-question, claiming, “Yeah, I do too, much more so than you,” before continuing to berate CNN and MS NOW. He later suggested that other outlets, including *The New York Times* and *The Washington Post*, could face similar restrictions. “There may be others to join ’em,” he said, though he did not issue a formal directive banning additional news outlets.

The ban has reignited concerns about the erosion of press freedoms under Trump’s leadership. Jim Acosta, a former CNN reporter, called the move “a slippery slope” and urged media outlets to collectively resist by suing the administration. PEN America criticized Trump for conflating criticism with “fake news,” stating, “This administration’s hostility toward the press is never about the accuracy of news stories, but about its inability to withstand scrutiny.”

MS NOW’s statement emphasized its commitment to defending “the essential role of independent journalism in our democracy,” while *The Guardian* noted that the ban has “thrown into stark relief Trump’s attack on press freedom in the US.” The network also highlighted that the White House, funded by taxpayer dollars, belongs to the American people.

Key questions remain about the scope and legality of the ban. It is unclear whether the restrictions apply to all White House events or only specific locations, such as the West Wing. Additionally, the administration has not provided a clear process for appealing the decision, leaving journalists in a legal and logistical limbo. CNN and Politico have not yet filed formal complaints, but legal experts suggest that challenges could emerge if the ban is enforced broadly.

The situation underscores the ongoing tension between executive authority and press freedoms in the United States. As legal and political battles unfold, the next steps will hinge on whether the ban is expanded, challenged in court, or withdrawn, with significant implications for the future of independent journalism.