2026年9月23日 美国东部时间上午9:15 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
作者
雅各布·罗森 司法部记者
杰克·罗森是负责报道美国司法部的记者。他此前曾是竞选数字记者，报道特朗普总统2024年竞选活动，还曾担任《与玛格丽特·布伦南面对面》节助理制片人。
阅读完整简历
华盛顿—— 美国司法部律师周二为特朗普总统因三家新闻机构对其政府的报道而将它们排除在白宫之外的举措进行辩护，称这些媒体的报道引发了国家安全担忧，并声称其记者未能秉持“职业操守和礼仪”行事。
在向华盛顿特区联邦地区法院提交的文件中，特朗普政府辩称，总统对美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）、MS NOW和政治报的禁令是合法的。这些新闻机构的记者被剥夺了白宫媒体“硬通行证”，无法进入白宫园区。
“进入白宫是一项特权，而非权利，”美国司法部律师写道。
特朗普政府辩称，总统的禁令符合第一修正案，因为政府至少有两个“令人信服的理由”拒绝这些记者进入：为新闻行业执行“最低职业操守标准”以及保护机密信息。
“总统认为，基本的新闻业标准要求进行采访、征求评论，并提供合理的回应机会，”他们表示，“最基本的是，发布机密和敏感的国家安全信息是对礼仪的严重违反。”
美国司法部还向法院提交了白宫新闻办公室周二致三家新闻机构的信件，通知它们总统决定撤销其记者的硬通行证。
这些信件声称，这些新闻机构“表现出违反了获准进入白宫园区人员应遵循的职业操守和礼仪标准的行为，包括传播关于国家安全和其他问题的可证实的虚假信息，以及发布敏感或机密信息”。
白宫给CNN、MS NOW和政治报设定了周五下午5点的期限，要求它们对这些指控作出回应。
这些信件似乎旨在回应三家新闻机构提出的禁令剥夺了它们正当法律程序的主张，因为它们的记者没有收到事先通知，被告知将被拒绝进入白宫，也没有机会在撤销通行证前发表申辩。
“总统没有提前通知，就会立即拒绝那些他不喜欢其报道的新闻机构进入白宫园区，”这些新闻机构的律师在一份文件中表示，“他拒绝准入的标准武断且模糊——实际上几乎不能称之为标准。”
美国司法部的回应是在一场听证会之前做出的，听证会定于周三下午举行，届时法官将考虑是否下令白宫恢复这些媒体机构的通行证和准入权限。
这三家新闻机构周一起诉了特朗普先生和政府高级官员，称其禁令是“对第一修正案的直接攻击”，也是“对我们最基本宪法原则的公然违反”。诉讼将特朗普先生和他的三名高级助手列为被告：白宫办公厅主任苏西·怀尔斯、白宫通讯主任史蒂文·张，以及特勤局局长肖恩·柯伦。
这些新闻机构请求由特朗普先生在首届总统任期内任命到联邦法院的美国地区法官蒂莫西·凯利快速作出裁决，允许它们再次进入白宫。
这些机构在法庭文件中辩称，禁令侵犯了它们的正当程序权利，因为特朗普先生“在禁令实施前没有提前通知这些公司”，也没有给CNN、MS NOW或政治报机会在禁令宣布前以及记者的媒体通行证被没收前反对该禁令。
这些机构表示，禁令还违反了第一修正案，因为它“公然基于编辑立场进行歧视”，并且“目的是迫使CNN、MS NOW和政治报对政府提供更有利的报道，同时威慑其他记者和新闻机构报道特朗普先生可能认为不利的新闻”。
凯利曾在特朗普首届政府期间审理过美国有线电视新闻网前记者吉姆·阿科斯塔提起的诉讼，当时白宫撤销了他的媒体通行证。在CNN提起诉讼后，法官支持阿科斯塔，下令恢复他的媒体通行证，认定阿科斯塔的第五修正案正当程序权利受到了侵犯。白宫遵守了该命令，CNN随后不久撤回了诉讼。
特朗普先生还曾禁止美联社参加某些白宫活动，原因是该新闻机构拒绝遵守特朗普宣布将墨西哥湾更名为“美国湾”的公告。
这家通讯社以违反第一修正案为由提起诉讼。虽然华盛顿特区的一名联邦法官最初裁定白宫必须恢复该新闻机构的准入权限，但上诉法院后来允许禁令生效。该案的诉讼仍在进行中。
美国哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院的裁决依据是，美联社被禁止进入椭圆形办公室、空军一号等仅少数白宫记者团成员可以进入的受限区域——这一政策比针对CNN、MS NOW和政治报的全面禁令范围更窄。
在一份2比1的裁决中，多数方的两名法官尼奥米·拉奥和格雷戈里·卡察斯表示，白宫不能基于记者的观点，将他们排除在“通常对媒体开放”的场所之外，例如新闻简报室。特朗普先生在首届总统任期内将拉奥和卡察斯任命到哥伦比亚特区巡回法院。
自特朗普先生重返白宫开启第二届任期以来，他的新闻办公室接管了记者团轮换池的管理工作，该轮换池由每天报道总统活动、并向数千家其他新闻机构分发信息和 footage 的记者组成。
总统的禁令已经扰乱了这一信息流动：CNN是包括哥伦比亚广播公司新闻、美国广播公司新闻、全国广播公司新闻和福克斯新闻在内的电视轮换池成员，原计划周一随特朗普先生前往纽约参加联合国大会。
但这家原本将负责电视轮换池报道时段的电视台，因总统的禁令被取消了随行资格。因此，轮换池中的其他四家电视台决定暂停电视轮换池运作，以声援CNN的同事们。
DOJ defends Trump White House media ban, citing national security and “professionalism and decorum”
2026-09-23 09:15 AM EDT / CBS News
By
Jacob Rosen Justice Department Reporter
Jake Rosen is a reporter covering the Department of Justice. He was previously a campaign digital reporter covering President Trump’s 2024 campaign and also served as an associate producer for “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
Read Full Bio
Washington — Justice Department lawyers on Tuesday defended President Trump’s move to bar three news outlets from the White House over coverage of his administration, arguing that their reporting raises national security concerns and claiming their journalists failed to act with “professionalism and decorum.”
In a filing with a federal district court in Washington, D.C., the Trump administration argued the president’s ban of CNN, MS NOW and Politico is legally sound. Reporters from those news organizations were stripped of their press credentials, also called “hard passes,” denying them access to the White House grounds.
“Access to the White House is a privilege, not a right,” Justice Department lawyers wrote.
The Trump administration argued the president’s ban complies with the First Amendment, because the government has at least two “compelling reasons” for denying the reporters’ access: enforcing “minimum standards of professionalism” for the press and protecting classified information.
“The President believes basic journalistic standards require calling, asking for comment, and providing a reasonable opportunity for a response,” they said. “At a bare minimum, it is a significant violation of decorum to publish classified and sensitive national security information.”
The Justice Department also submitted to the court letters from the White House press office, dated Tuesday, to each of the three outlets notifying them that the president decided to revoke their journalists’ hard passes.
The letters claim that the news outlets have “exhibited behavior in violation of the standards of professionalism and decorum expected of those given access to the White House Complex, including by trafficking in verifiable falsehoods about national security and other issues, and publishing sensitive or classified information.”
The White House gave CNN, MS NOW and Politico a deadline of 5 p.m. Friday to respond to its claims.
The letters appear designed to address the news outlets’ claims that the ban deprived them of due process, since their reporters didn’t receive advance notice that they would be denied access to the White House and an opportunity to be heard before revoking their credentials.
“The President provided no notice that he would immediately deny news organizations whose reporting he dislikes access to the White House grounds,” lawyers for the organizations said in a filing. “His standard for denying access is arbitrary and vague — indeed, it can hardly be called a standard at all.”
The Justice Department’s response comes ahead of a hearing, set for Wednesday afternoon, during which a judge will consider whether to order the White House to restore the media organizations’ credentials and access.
The three news organizations sued Mr. Trump and top administration officials on Monday, calling his ban a “direct assault on the First Amendment” and a “blatant violation of our most fundamental constitutional principles.” The lawsuit names Mr. Trump and three of his top aides: Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff; Steven Cheung, White House communications director; and Sean Curran, the head of Secret Service.
The news outlets asked U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, who was appointed to the federal bench by Mr. Trump during his first term, to rule quickly to once again allow them access to the White House.
The organizations argued in their court filings that the ban violates their due process rights because Mr. Trump “provided no notice” to the companies before banning them, and no opportunity for CNN, MS NOW, or Politico to oppose the ban before it was announced and reporters for the news outlets had their press credentials confiscated.
The ban, the organizations say, also violates the First Amendment because it “brazenly discriminates based on editorial viewpoint,” and “to coerce more favorable coverage of the administration from CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO, and to deter other journalists and news organizations from reporting that the President might view as unfavorable.”
Kelly oversaw a lawsuit brought by former CNN reporter Jim Acosta during the first Trump administration after the White House moved to revoke his press credential. The judge sided with Acosta after CNN sued and ordered his press pass to be restored, finding Acosta’s due process rights under the Fifth Amendment had been violated. The White House complied with the order, and CNN dropped the lawsuit shortly afterward.
Mr. Trump has also barred The Associated Press from attending certain White House events after the news outlet refused to conform to Mr. Trump’s proclamation that changed the name of the Gulf of Mexico to “Gulf of America.”
The wire service sued on First Amendment grounds. While a federal judge in D.C. initially ruled that the White House must restore the news outlet’s access, an appeals court later allowed the ban to take effect. The litigation in that case is ongoing.
The ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit hinged on the fact that the AP was blocked from certain restricted spaces like the Oval Office and Air Force One that only a small subset of the White House press corps can access — a narrower policy than the outright ban imposed on CNN, MS NOW and Politico.
In a 2-1 decision, the two judges in the majority, Neomi Rao and Gregory Katsas, said the White House can’t ban journalists from spaces that are “generally open to the press,” like the briefing room, based on their viewpoint. Mr. Trump appointed both Rao and Katsas to the D.C. Circuit in his first term.
Since Mr. Trump returned to the White House for his second term, his press office assumed control of the press pool, a rotating group of journalists who cover the president every day and disseminate information and footage to thousands of other news outlets.
The president’s ban has already disrupted that information flow: CNN is a member of the television pool system, which includes CBS News, ABC News, NBC News and Fox News, and was scheduled to travel with Mr. Trump to New York on Monday for the United Nations General Assembly.
But the network, which was set to provide coverage in the TV pool slot, was kicked off the trip because of the president’s ban. As a result, the four other networks in the rotation decided to suspend the television pool altogether in solidarity with their CNN colleagues.
发表回复