CNN had argued that the White House had violated Mr. Acosta’s free speech and due process rights, citing a case from the 1970s that required the White House to demonstrate a clear process, and right of appeal, before revoking a reporter’s credentials. Judge Kelly said the Trump administration had been unable to articulate the process that led to stripping Mr. Acosta of his press pass.
The administration contended that presidents enjoy broad discretion to bar journalists from the White House, and that Mr. Acosta’s barbed questioning and refusal to yield his microphone at the contentious conference in the East Room on Nov. 7 was boorish and disrespectful.
Mr. Acosta, who attended the hearing and showed no emotion when the ruling was announced, thanked the judge afterward.
“Let’s go back to work,” he told reporters outside the courthouse.
The case, CNN v. Donald J. Trump, had come to symbolize the dysfunctional dynamic between Mr. Trump and the White House press corps.
It also revealed that much of the interaction between presidents and the press is based on custom, rather than any kind of legal framework. Reporters have had access to the White House for decades, but the mechanics of the tradition have rarely been enshrined in law.
“The relationship between the White House and the beginnings of the press corps came about as a matter of mutual convenience, not as a matter of legal grounding,” said Stephen Ponder, a media historian who has written on reporters in the White House.
No president relishes being scrutinized by the news media, and administrations have long relied on subtle and not-so-subtle methods to ice out reporters they considered troublesome by, for instance, ignoring their questions at briefings or giving scoops to their competitors.
Article source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/business/media/cnn-acosta-trump.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Speak Your Mind
You must be logged in to post a comment.