On Sept. 18, President Donald Trump announced that CNN, MS NOW and Politico would be barred from the White House, saying their accumulated coverage had crossed a line. In a Truth Social post, he called them part of the “Fake News Media” and warned that other outlets could be next, adding: “You get sick of it.”¹

The three organizations challenged the move as a First Amendment violation, arguing that the loss of their White House “hard pass” credentials was not a routine access dispute but retaliation against news coverage. The administration, meanwhile, contended that revoking the passes was necessary to protect national security.

On Thursday, as Trump prepared to host Chinese President Xi Jinping for a high-stakes meeting, U.S. District Judge Tim Kelly ordered the credentials temporarily restored. Kelly, a Trump appointee, rejected the Justice Department’s request to hold off for at least two days and directed the White House to “return, reinstate and restore” the passes.¹

Kelly’s order was a sharp rebuke to the national-security rationale. “Simply put,” he wrote, “the record lacks factual support” for the claim that the revocations would protect national security or that restoring access while the case proceeds would endanger it.¹

The temporary restraining order lasts 14 days and preserves the pre-ban arrangement while the broader lawsuit moves forward. For the outlets, it is an immediate victory; for the White House, it leaves its broader fight with the press unresolved—but constrained by a court that found its stated case wanting.¹