2026年9月29日 美国东部时间上午6:37 / 哥伦比亚广播公司/美联社
本月被特朗普总统突然禁止进入白宫场地的三家新闻机构向联邦法院请求暂停该禁令的执行，直至相关案件审结。它们指出，尽管法官已发布限制令，特朗普政府仍“持续以不可预测且前后不一致的方式执行禁令”，其中包括有选择地禁止CNN承担白宫 pool（记者轮换 pool）的报道任务。
“白宫的言行无不表明，只要有机会，就会立即恢复对CNN、MS NOW和《政治报》的全面禁令，”CNN、MS NOW和《政治报》的律师在周一晚间提交的诉状中写道。
“该禁令是对第一修正案核心自由的非法攻击，如果不加以制止，将对原告和公众造成不可挽回的损害，因此本院应在案件审结前发布初步禁令，暂停该禁令的执行，”诉状中写道。
这是特朗普政府第二届任期内与新闻媒体反复交锋的最新进展。双方关系一直紧张，引发了多起涉及第一修正案的争议，导致白宫和五角大楼记者受到制裁与限制，并有多起诉讼正在联邦法院系统审理中。
美国地区法官蒂莫西·凯利上周发布了为期两周的临时限制令，暂停特朗普对三家机构的禁令，恢复了这些媒体的白宫采访权限，但该禁令将于10月8日到期。周一提交的诉状中请求的初步禁令将使这些媒体的白宫采访权限得以延长，直至案件最终审结。
在诉状提交后立即通过电子邮件发给美联社的一份声明中，三家新闻机构的首席律师西奥多·J·布卢斯 Jr.称该禁令“公然违反了第一修正案和正当程序”。
“总统及其政府始终明确表明，这项禁令只有一个目的：惩罚那些他不喜欢的报道，”布卢斯说。
“这纯粹是报复和基于观点的歧视，”布卢斯说。“随着地区法院的临时限制令将于本周到期，确保白宫继续无法执行这项违宪的对新闻自由的禁令至关重要。”
在上周的听证会上，凯利已暗示他对特朗普禁止三家机构进入白宫场地的做法持怀疑态度，称这些机构在被切断采访权限前未获得正当程序。
周一提交诉状的前一天，特朗普政府明确表示不会放弃其立场，即9月19日开始的突然禁令是合理的。
“说到白宫，这是人民的房子，”司法部长托德·布兰奇周日在接受美国广播公司采访时说道，他援引了政府自一开始就提出的论点。“进入白宫是一种特权，而非权利。”
周一提交的42页诉状重申了新闻机构在最初针对特朗普和白宫提起的诉讼中提出的诸多论点，该诉讼是在记者被禁两天后提起的。
诉状还提及了白宫广播记者轮换 pool制度，这在过去几天成为特朗普与媒体对峙的焦点。
诉状称，白宫“持续以不可预测且前后不一致的方式执行禁令，包括在9月26日禁止CNN履行其指定电视网络轮换 pool的职责——这损害了CNN、其他轮换 pool成员，最终也损害了美国公众的利益”。
禁令实施时，CNN被解除了作为广播轮换 pool成员的职责。该轮换 pool由五大主要电视台组成：CNN、ABC、CBS、NBC和福克斯新闻。其他电视台为声援CNN，决定暂停轮换 pool的报道工作，直至CNN恢复资格。
周五，CNN被允许报道总统与中国领导人习近平在国家档案馆的会晤。但周六又遭遇新的挫折：白宫禁止CNN搭乘空军一号，使其无法报道特朗普前往田纳西州观看大学橄榄球比赛的行程。其余轮换 pool成员拒绝指派替代媒体，以声援CNN。
布兰奇也为这一决定辩护。“总统完全有权决定谁可以搭乘他的专机，”他在周日的采访中说道。他补充说，特朗普“厌倦了某些媒体拒绝报道准确新闻”。他还称，他所说的“虚假信息”的新闻报道构成了国家安全问题。
“当白宫传出彻头彻尾的虚假信息时，这才是真正的国家安全问题，”他说。
凯利在上周发布暂停白宫禁令的临时限制令的裁决中驳斥了这一论点。“法院对……被告以维护国家安全为借口剥夺采访权限的真实动机持怀疑态度，”凯利写道。
他的裁决并未直接涉及电视轮换 pool制度。在新提交的诉状中，原告描述了轮换 pool的重要职能，并指出这是媒体传统上获得的、对总统及其活动进行常规采访的重要组成部分——这一权限必须恢复。
诉状特别提到了空军一号事件。“CNN未收到白宫任何关于其被排除在外的正式通知，”诉状写道。“由于CNN被排除在外且未指定替代机构，没有主要电视网络轮换 pool成员陪同总统出行。”
据一位熟悉轮换 pool运作的匿名人士透露，目前轮换 pool内的电视台决定根据具体情况处理当前的对峙局面。
周日，福克斯新闻报道了一场轮换 pool活动；周一，NBC在椭圆形办公室报道了总统的活动。CNN要到周四才能恢复轮换资格。如果该电视台再次被禁止参与轮换 pool活动，各电视台将共同决定—— presumably根据事件的新闻价值——是像之前那样指派替代机构还是放弃报道。
相关争议问题棘手。一方面，电视台希望为新闻自由发声，反对恐吓媒体报道的行为；另一方面，媒体机构显然有向受众提供新闻的职责。
“没有太多好的选择，”耶鲁法学院媒体自由与信息获取诊所主任戴维·A·舒尔茨说道。
舒尔茨表示，如果白宫继续禁止CNN，各电视台可能会选择“动用其市场力量，说‘我们不会再配合你们’”。
他补充道，问题在于：“谁会先让步？”
犹他大学法学教授罗恩内尔·安德森·琼斯指出，各电视台“很可能觉得自己进退两难”。
“妥协可能会被视为放弃新闻自由的核心原则，”安德森·琼斯说。“但长期缺席白宫新闻报道的实际情况也很复杂，拒绝报道政府最高层的重大新闻本身也可能被视为未能实现民主的目标。”
3 news outlets seek extension of ban on their being blocked from White House
September 29, 2026 6:37 AM EDT / CBS/AP
Three news organizations that President Trump abruptly banished from White House grounds this month asked a federal court to block the ban until the case against it is resolved, saying the administration has “persisted in unpredictably and inconsistently implementing its ban” despite a judge’s restraining order – including selectively barring CNN from White House pool duties.
“The White House’s words and actions leave little doubt that it will immediately reinstitute a complete ban of CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO if allowed the opportunity,” lawyers for CNN, MS NOW and Politico wrote in a filing late Monday.
“Because the ban is an unlawful assault on the most fundamental First Amendment freedoms and will inflict irreparable harm on Plaintiffs and the public if not restrained, this Court should preliminarily enjoin its enforcement pending the resolution of this case,” the filing said.
It was the latest development in the back-and-forth saga of the Trump administration and the news media during the second term of his presidency. It has been a contentious relationship that has raised multiple First Amendment questions, produced sanctions and restrictions on White House and Pentagon reporters and led to several lawsuits that are winding their ways through the federal court system.
A two-week temporary restraining order on Mr. Trump’s ban of the three organizations, issued by U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly last week, restored the outlets’ White House access, but expires Oct. 8. The preliminary injunction requested in Monday’s filing would extend the White House access until the case is finally resolved.
In a statement emailed to The Associated Press immediately after the filing, the lead attorney for the three news outlets called the ban “a blatant violation of the First Amendment and due process.”
“The president and his administration have continued to make clear that this ban has only one purpose: to punish reporting he doesn’t like,” said the lawyer, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.
“That’s retaliation and viewpoint discrimination, pure and simple,” Boutrous said. “With the district court’s temporary restraining order expiring this week, it is critical to ensure that the White House continues to be prevented from implementing this unconstitutional ban on the free press.”
At least week’s hearing, Kelly signaled he is skeptical of the president’s ban on the threee outlets from White House grounds, saying they weren’t given due process before their access was cut off.
Monday’s filing came a day after the Trump administration made clear it was not backing down from its contention that the sudden ban, which began Sept. 19, was justified.
“When it comes to the White House, it is the people’s house,” Attorney General Todd Blanche said on ABC on Sunday, invoking an argument the administration has made since the beginning. “It is a privilege, and not a right, to be there.”
Monday’s 42-page filing reiterated many of the arguments that the news outlets made in their original lawsuit against Mr. Trump and the White House, filed two days after the reporters were banned.
It also added mention of the White House broadcast pool rotation, which has become a battleground in the last few days in the standoff between Mr. Trump and the media.
The White House, it said, “has persisted in unpredictably and inconsistently implementing its ban, including by barring CNN from fulfilling its role as designated television network pooler on Sept. 26 – to the detriment of CNN, its fellow pool members and, ultimately, the American public.”
When the ban was implemented, CNN was removed from its duties as part of the broadcast pool, which consists of the five main networks: CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox News. In solidarity, the other networks decided to suspend the pool until CNN was allowed back in.
On Friday, CNN was allowed to cover the president with Chinese leader Xi Jinping at the National Archives. But in a new setback Saturday, the White House banned the network from Air Force One, preventing it from covering Mr. Trump’s trip to a college football game in Tennessee. The rest of the pool declined to provide a replacement, in solidarity with CNN.
Blanche defended that decision, as well. “The president has every right to decide who gets to fly on his plane,” he said in the Sunday interview. He added that Mr. Trump was “sick and tired of certain media outlets just refusing to report accurate news.” He added that news coverage he described as “misinformation” amounted to a national security issue.
“That is what is a national security problem, when you have complete misinformation coming out of the White House,” he said.
Kelly threw cold water on that argument in his ruling last week granting the temporary restraining order against the White House ban. “The court is skeptical … that defendants’ interest in safeguarding national security is the actual motivation” for removal of access, Kelly wrote.
His ruling did not directly address the TV pool rotation. In the new filing, the plaintiffs describe the important function the pool provides and makes the case that it’s an important part of the regular access to the president, and his activities, that the media have traditionally had – and that must be restored.
It singles out the Air Force One case. “CNN received no official communication from the White House explaining its exclusion,” the filing says. “Because CNN was excluded and no replacement designated, no primary television network pooler accompanied the President on the trip.”
For now, networks in the pool have decided to address the ongoing standoff on a case-by-case basis, according to a person familiar with the pool’s operation, speaking on condition of anonymity to give details of ongoing discussions.
On Sunday, Fox covered a pool event; on Monday, NBC was covering the president in the Oval Office. CNN is not in the rotation until Thursday. If the network is again barred from a pool event, the networks will decide together, presumably based on the newsworthiness of the situation, whether to provide a replacement or to refrain from coverage as they did previously.
The issues at stake are difficult. On the one hand, the networks want to take a stand on behalf of press freedom and against efforts to intimidate coverage. On the other, media outlets have an obvious purpose of providing news to their audiences.
“There are not a lot of good options,” said David A. Schulz, director of the Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic at Yale Law School.
Should the White House continue to bar CNN, Schulz said, networks may choose “to exert their market power and say, ‘We’re not going to play ball with you.’”
The question, Schulz added, is: “Who’s going to back down first?”
The networks “may well feel like they’re between a rock and a hard place,” noted RonNell Andersen Jones, a law professor at the University of Utah.
“Capitulation might be perceived as abandonment of core components of press freedom,” Andersen Jones said. “But the practicalities of lengthy White House news blackouts are also complicated, and refusing to cover major news at the highest levels of government might itself feel like a failure to serve the goals of democracy.”