Wittes rejects excluding the press for political retaliation
Benjamin WittesLawfare editor-in-chief; plaintiff
Wittes says the White House should not use exclusion to punish disfavored articles or coerce favorable reporting.
“The simple principle that the White House should not exclude the press for overtly political reasons, to retaliate for disfavored articles, or to coerce favorable coverage should be sacrosanct across the political spectrum”
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 Knight Institute publishes the plaintiffs' own statements explaining their challenge to White House press restrictions.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
The six plaintiffs in the lawsuit each explain why they joined, saying the White House's restrictions on journalists are depriving the public of independent reporting. Wittes is introduced as editor-in-chief of Lawfare and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
After the quotation
He says his professional work relies on accurate information about the presidency.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The conduct at issue is excluding White House journalists because of their coverage. This statement expressly criticizes those restrictions.
- Recorded on
- Published here
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
- Wittes rejects excluding the press for political retaliation
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/6906-wittes-says-the-white-house-should-not-use
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Wittes rejects excluding the press for political retaliation". First published: 2026-10-27. Last updated: 2026-10-27. https://disputeindex.com/events/6906-wittes-says-the-white-house-should-not-use