FIRE’s Conor Fitzpatrick calls the ban “a flagrant violation of the First Amendment”
Foundation for Individual Rights and ExpressionChief supervising attorney at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, interviewed on ABC’s This Week
Asked on ABC’s This Week whether the ban will “fly,” Conor Fitzpatrick, FIRE’s chief supervising attorney, said no, citing Sherrill v. Knight (1977) and last year’s Associated Press case for the rule that the White House cannot exclude reporters because it dislikes their reporting. He said he expected courts to very quickly enjoin the exclusions, and asked viewers to imagine a future Democratic administration removing Fox News, Newsmax or the Wall Street Journal.
“The law in this area is clear, and it's been clear for 50 years. In 1977, in a case called "Sherrill versus Knight," the courts held that the White House cannot exclude reporters simply because they don't like their reporting. That has been the law for Democratic presidents. It has been the law for Republican presidents. That law was reaffirmed just last year in the Associated Press case. So what's going on here is a flagrant violation of the First Amendment.”
Original text
Reporting
Other statements by Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression in this case
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
Original text
About this source
ABC News' rush transcript of This Week for September 20, 2026. Jonathan Karl introduces Conor Fitzpatrick as an attorney for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, an organization he describes as having consistently defended free speech against attacks from both the left and the right.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Reporting
About this source
The Washington Times' roundup of Sunday-show remarks on the ban by Mike Waltz on CNN, Steve Scalise on ABC, Sen. John Barrasso on NBC, FIRE's Conor Fitzpatrick on ABC and Weijia Jiang on Fox News.
Before the quotation
Karl introduced FIRE as “an organization that has consistently defended attacks on free speech from both the left and the right” and asked: “Is this ban on these press organizations going to fly?”
After the quotation
Fitzpatrick added that the precedent “is nonpartisan. It is unequivocal,” and that the message of the ban is to “report the news in the way we want you to report the news about this administration, or we’re going to kick you out.” FIRE also issued a statement on September 18, recorded separately.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
On Trump’s decision to exclude CNN, MS NOW and Politico from White House access because of their coverage, FIRE condemns the exclusion, calling it “a flagrant violation of the First Amendment” and predicting that courts will quickly enjoin it. No competing label plausibly applies.
- 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
- FIRE’s Conor Fitzpatrick calls the ban “a flagrant violation of the First Amendment”
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/1326-asked-on-abc-s-this-week-whether-the
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "FIRE’s Conor Fitzpatrick calls the ban “a flagrant violation of the First Amendment”". First published: 2026-09-21. Last updated: 2026-09-22. https://disputeindex.com/events/1326-asked-on-abc-s-this-week-whether-the