特朗普政府周五坚称，有权禁止三家全国性新闻机构的记者进入白宫；与此同时，一名联邦法官正权衡是否在法律诉讼持续期间无限期恢复这些记者进入白宫的权限。
The Trump administration on Friday insisted that it has a right to ban journalists from three national news organizations from accessing the White House as a federal judge weighs whether to restore access to the journalists indefinitely while the legal battle continues.
美国司法部在一份新的法庭文件中反对法院发布命令，要求撤销唐纳德·特朗普总统针对新闻媒体的禁令，并恢复MS NOW、CNN和Politico进入白宫的权限。政府一直坚持总统的禁令是合法的。
In a new court filing, the Department of Justice argued against a court order that would reverse President Donald Trump’s press ban and restore access to MS NOW, CNN and Politico. The government has maintained that the president’s ban is lawful.
政府坚称，其行动符合《美国宪法第一修正案》，并非出于报复，也不构成观点歧视。
The administration maintained that its actions are lawful under the First Amendment, and are not retaliatory or viewpoint discrimination.
政府还主张已经为相关方提供了正当程序，并援引了禁令生效后白宫致函这些新闻机构的信件。这些信件声称已给予新闻机构对被逐出白宫一事作出回应的机会。
They also alleged that due process was given, pointing to the letters the White House sent to the news organizations after the ban went into effect. Those letters purported to give the news organizations the opportunity to respond to the expulsion.
“原告拒绝提交任何回应、未请求延期，也未以其他方式为其行为辩护。因此，上周五下午5时，总统撤销原告持续进入白宫权限的初步决定虽暂时受到法院禁令约束、无法继续执行，但已成为最终决定。”他们在法庭文件中写道。
“Plaintiffs declined to submit any response, request any extension, or otherwise defend their conduct. Accordingly, at 5:00pm last Friday, the President’s preliminary decision to revoke Plaintiffs’ continued access to the White House, though temporarily enjoined from continuing in effect, became final,” they wrote in the filing.
政府律师表示，这些新闻机构的主要论点站不住脚。他们写道：“所有论点都源于一个错误结论，即进入白宫享有某种特殊财产权利或法律利益。事实并非如此。”
The government’s attorneys said the news organizations’ main arguments are flawed. “All flow from the mistaken conclusion that there is a special property or legal interest in access to the White House,” they wrote.
CNN、MS NOW和Politico的律师西奥多·布特鲁斯（Theodore Boutrous）周五就该提交文件发表声明：“白宫今晚提交的文件表明，总统所谓‘封杀新闻自由’是站不住脚的。法律的规定绝对明确。这一禁令对我们的客户、《第一修正案》以及整个公众造成了严重损害。法院必须下令白宫停止实施这项违宪的封杀新闻自由禁令。”
“There is not.”
凯利将于周四听取媒体机构关于申请长期禁止政府实施白宫准入禁令的陈述——恰逢他现行命令预定失效之日。不过，他表示有意听取各方陈述并“迅速作出裁决”。周一，三家受影响新闻机构的律师请求美国地区法官蒂莫西·凯利在诉讼继续期间阻止特朗普的禁令。如果获准，该命令将延长凯利上周采取的紧急救济措施；当时他曾阻止该禁令，为期两周。
Theodore Boutrous, attorney for CNN, MS NOW and Politico, responded to Friday’s filing in a statement: “The White House’s filing tonight shows the President’s ‘ban on the free press’ is indefensible. The law is absolutely clear. The harm to our clients, the First Amendment, and the public as a whole is profound. It is critical that the White House is enjoined to keep this unconstitutional ban on the free press out of commission.”Kelly will hear arguments on the media organizations’ request for a longer-term block on the administration’s access ban on Thursday– the same day his current order is set to expire. But he indicated he intends to hear arguments and “rule expeditiously.”On Monday, lawyers representing the three affected news organizations asked U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly to block Trump’s ban while litigation continues.
三家新闻机构的律师再次主张，该禁令同时违反《第一修正案》和《第五修正案》的正当程序条款。他们表示，如果不提供长期救济，特朗普政府将恢复实施该禁令。
If granted, that order would extend the emergency relief Kelly handed down last week when he blocked the ban for two weeks. Lawyers for the three news organizations again argued the ban violated both the First Amendment and the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.
“白宫的言行足以表明：只要有机会，它就会立即重新实施对CNN、MS NOW以及POLITICO的全面禁令，”这些新闻机构的律师写道。“该禁令严重侵犯了《第一修正案》所保障的基本自由；若不加以制止，必将给原告及公众造成无法挽回的损害。”在凯利作出裁决后，白宫花了近12个小时才重新恢复这些记者的采访资格。此外，白宫仍继续阻止CNN参与由五家电视网组成的联合报道团队的工作——该团队负责共同报道总统相关新闻。
They said without longer-term relief, the Trump administration would revive the ban. “The White House’s words and actions leave little doubt that it will immediately reinstate a complete ban of CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO if allowed the opportunity,” lawyers for the news organizations wrote. “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.”It took the White House nearly 12 hours to reinstate the journalists’ press credentials after Kelly issued his ruling.
目前，凯利尚未对这些新闻机构提出的《第一修正案》相关诉求作出回应。上周他虽曾叫停该禁令，但当时仅基于正当程序原则作出裁决。他认为特朗普政府在实施禁令并没收记者采访证之前，并未给予相关人员应有的程序保障。
The White House has also continued to block CNN from performing its duties as part of the five-network television pool that shares resources to broadcast coverage of the president. Kelly has not yet addressed the news organizations’ First Amendment claims. When he blocked the ban last week, he only ruled on due process grounds.
“现有记录中没有任何‘正式制定的标准’可用来判定被告方撤销记者采访证的依据，”凯利写道。“被告方似乎提出的唯一标准——即其在2026年9月22日致原告的信件中所指出的那些‘违规报道’——实在过于模糊，根本无法作为判定依据。”他补充道：“更值得注意的是，原告贝琪·克莱因发表那些所谓‘违规报道’数月后，被告方仍恢复了她的采访资格，这一事实足以推翻‘她或其所在媒体事先知晓相关行为违反规定’的论点。”
He found the Trump administration had not given the journalists appropriate due process before enacting the ban and confiscating press credentials. “The record is bereft of any relevant ‘formally articulated standards’ in place before any of the conduct for which the Defendants revoked their hard passes,” Kelly wrote“One standard Defendants appear to offer – reflected in letters they sent to plaintiffs on September 22, 2026, identifying their objectionable reporting– is so vague it hardly does the trick.”“Moreover, Defendants renewed Plaintiff Betsy Klein’s hard pass several months after she published some of the identified reporting, undercutting any argument that she or her employer, for example, had the requisite notice that the conduct at issue violated a relevant standard,” Kelly added.
凯利在2018年做出过类似裁决，当时他审理了一起法律挑战，起因是白宫吊销了时任CNN记者吉姆·阿科斯塔的采访证。凯利认定白宫未给予阿科斯塔正当程序，并下令特朗普政府恢复其采访证。在凯利有机会处理第一修正案相关主张之前，阿科斯塔选择主动撤诉。
Kelly issued a similar ruling in 2018 when he oversaw a legal challenge after the White House revoked then-CNN correspondent Jim Acosta’s credentials. Kelly found the White House had not given Acosta due process and ordered the Trump administration to restore the credential. Acosta chose to voluntarily dismiss the case before Kelly had the opportunity to address the First Amendment claims.
巡回法院的判例规定，白宫不得任意拒绝记者的采访证申请，因为白宫采访权受第一修正案保护，不得在未经正当程序的情况下被吊销。
Circuit court precedent says the White House may not arbitrarily deny a journalist a press credential because press access to the White House is protected by the First Amendment and may not be revoked without due process.
本案涉及的第一修正案问题仍未解决，因为新闻机构继续主张特朗普的禁令既是报复性的，也是赤裸裸的观点歧视。该帖子 特朗普政府在新
The First Amendment issues in this case remain unsettled, as the news organizations continue to argue Trump’s ban was both retaliatory and blatant viewpoint discrimination. The post Trump administration insists in new court filing it can ban MS NOW, CNN and Politico from White House MS NOW