Six citizens argue Trump's media ban robs the public of news

Six citizens have filed a federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump, claiming his White House media ban is depriving the public of its right to independent reporting. The suit argues that the restrictions on press access are not just affecting journalists but also the public’s ability to stay informed about government actions.

The lawsuit was filed in federal district court in New York on Monday and names Trump along with three key aides, including the White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles. The plaintiffs include a noted human rights advocate, a political journalist, a Yale history professor, a high school civics teacher, a legal journalist, and a student journalist at the University of Pennsylvania.

The plaintiffs argue that the White House cannot decide what information Americans receive by punishing critical reporting. The suit says the public is losing access to independent reporting and is getting something closer to government propaganda.

The Trump administration responded to the lawsuit in a statement attributed to an unidentified White House official, saying no person may demand access to the Oval Office. The administration also said media outlets that report misinformation and defamation are completely capable of reporting their manufactured stories from directly outside.

The new lawsuit is different from previous legal action against the president. It names ordinary citizens as plaintiffs, shifting the focus from news gatherers to news consumers, and thus implying a much larger pool of stakeholders. In addition, it seeks more wide-ranging relief.

The suit calls not merely for reinstatement of access that has already been impacted, but for a broad injunction that would protect from retaliation every news outlet that covers the White House, now, and in the future.

The complaint says defendants' policy of restricting the access of disfavored news organizations deprives the public of the reporting of those organizations. It also says the policy inevitably deprives them of the independent reporting of other news organizations as well.

The plaintiffs seek a declaration that the policy is unconstitutional because it imposes restrictions on a limited public forum that are viewpoint-based and unreasonable. They also seek an injunction barring defendants from enforcing the policy.

The six plaintiffs are: Kenneth Roth, Daniel Froomkin, Beverly Gage, Peter Schmidt-Nowara, Benjamin Wittes, and Ethan Young. They represent a wide range of professions and backgrounds, all of whom rely on independent and diverse White House reporting for their work.

Peter Schmidt-Nowara, a social studies teacher at a New York City high school, is quoted in the lawsuit as saying he wants his students to have access to accurate, independent reporting about their government. He added that he is gravely concerned that the Trump administration’s restrictions on White House reporters are cutting off access to crucial information.

Ethan Young, the student journalist, contends that since he can’t personally access White House press spaces, he relies on a diverse, independent and trustworthy cohort of White House reporters to serve as his proxy.

The effect of federal policy changes has been acutely felt on college campuses, Penn’s included,” Young is quoted as saying. “As a student journalist, I rely on reporting from the White House press corps to understand the decisions made in Washington, their consequences, and how they impact my college community. A vibrant free press allows me to do just that.”