In February, Donald Trump and his White House team announced that they’d already won their case against The Associated Press in the “Gulf of America” case. In fact, following a procedural development in February, the White House heavily promoted images featuring the Republican-preferred name for the Gulf of Mexico and a giant “VICTORY” stamp over the southeastern United States.
Those inclined to believe the president and his political operation likely assumed that the case was over. It was not. In fact, as NBC News reported, a federal judge has now ruled against the White House.
A federal judge on Tuesday called The Associated Press’ exclusion from White House events “contrary to the First Amendment” and ordered the Trump administration to treat the newswire as it would any other media publication. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden … ordered the administration to “put the AP on an equal playing field as similarly situated outlets, despite the AP’s use of disfavored terminology.”
“[U]nder the First Amendment, 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,” McFadden added in his ruling.
For those who might benefit from a refresher, it was in early February when the White House prevented Associated Press journalists from attending official events for an exceedingly misguided reason: AP reports referred to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of Mexico. Trump and his team want news organizations to instead use the Republican-endorsed name — the “Gulf of America” — so the White House punished the AP over it.
What was not immediately obvious at the time was whether the incident was a one-day retaliatory tantrum or the start of something larger. It quickly became apparent that the White House had settled on the latter.
The wire service took the matter to court, and in legal filings, White House officials acknowledged that the president personally approved the access ban for AP journalists.
Trump and his team were likely delighted to learn that the case would be heard by McFadden — a Trump-appointed conservative and longtime Federalist Society member. They were far less pleased when he ruled against the White House anyway.
The president and his lawyers said they would appeal the ruling, but as the case proceeds, it’s worth re-emphasizing the fact that there are larger principles at stake that are far broader than what people call a body of water. Indeed, this controversy, at its root, is about a White House waging an aggressive campaign against the free press and, in this instance, is also trying to bully one of the nation’s leading news organizations into submission as part of an Orwellian campaign. Team Trump appears to have embraced a vision of the First Amendment in which people and businesses are free to use the words and phrases that Republicans like — or face the consequences. A conservative federal judge has now told the White House that such a position is unconstitutional. This post updates our related earlier coverage.
Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans' War on the Recent Past."
Latest Post
Recommended
