Knight Institute's Jameel Jaffer says the ban would be "doubly unconstitutional" if it removes outlets from the press pool
Knight First Amendment InstituteFree-speech litigation and advocacy institute, in a press statement by executive director Jameel Jaffer
In a statement by executive director Jameel Jaffer, the Knight First Amendment Institute said the First Amendment prohibits the president from punishing journalists for coverage he dislikes, and that if Trump means to expel the outlets from the White House press pool his action is doubly unconstitutional because the pool is a public forum from which journalists cannot be excluded for their viewpoints.
“The First Amendment prohibits the president from punishing journalists because he doesn’t like their coverage, just as it prohibits him from punishing universities because he doesn’t like the courses they offer, or from punishing law firms because he doesn’t like the clients they represent. With so many courts having ruled against him on exactly this point, you’d think President Trump would have learned this lesson by now. If President Trump means to expel these news organizations from the White House press pool, his action is doubly unconstitutional because the press pool is a ‘public forum’ under the First Amendment, which means the president can’t exclude journalists from it on the basis of their viewpoints.”
Official statement
Where this statement fits
Should President Trump bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House over their coverage?
On Friday, September 18, 2026, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that, "effective immediately, I am banning" CNN, MS NOW and Politico "from the White House as a result of their constant 'reporting' FAKE NEWS!" About an hour later, in the Oval Office, he said no particular story prompted the decision, that he does not want the outlets "in my office," and that "somebody has a right to keep them away" if outlets write false stories. The three outlets and press-freedom groups oppose the exclusion, citing constitutional protection for the press, and the White House Correspondents' Association said it "stands in defense of our colleagues at CNN, MSNOW, and POLITICO." On Saturday, September 19, MS NOW, CNN and Politico said their White House reporters were refused entry and had press passes confiscated; the White House referred questions to Trump's earlier remarks. The dispute is over whether President Trump should exclude named news organizations from White House access over what they report.
Source and context
Official statement
About this source
The institute's own press statement on knightcolumbia.org.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
The institute published the statement on September 18, the day of Trump's post.
After the quotation
The statement describes the press pool only as a condition of its second argument: "If President Trump means to expel these news organizations from the White House press pool."
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The Knight Institute rejects the exclusion, saying punishing journalists for coverage is barred by the First Amendment. The closest competing label is “Mixed or conditional”, because the "doubly unconstitutional" argument begins "If President Trump means to expel these news organizations from the White House press pool". That loses because the condition only adds a second ground; the first sentence is an unconditional rejection.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Donald Trump
More from this case
Read the full caseBoutrous distinguishes pool-size limits from retaliation for reporting
“It’s retaliation for speech. That violates the First Amendment.”Read statement
White House says no journalist has a right to Oval Office or Air Force One access
The White House
“No person and no journalist has a constitutional right to access to the President's Oval Office, Air Force One, or other sensitive and private facilities.”Read statement
Schiff says White House press exclusions also harm the public
“When a reporter is denied access to the White House, it isn't just that news organization that suffers. The American people rely on a free press to know what their government is up to, and whether it is acting wisely and lawfully.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Knight Institute's Jameel Jaffer says the ban would be "doubly unconstitutional" if it removes outlets from the press pool
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/1148-in-a-statement-by-executive-director-jameel-jaffer
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Knight Institute's Jameel Jaffer says the ban would be "doubly unconstitutional" if it removes outlets from the press pool". First published: 2026-09-19. Last updated: 2026-09-22. https://disputeindex.com/events/1148-in-a-statement-by-executive-director-jameel-jaffer