First Amendment groups on Sunday rallied around the three news outlets banned by President Donald Trump, while one of the presidents appointees tried to defend the restriction.

CNN, MS NOW and Politico are preparing to take legal action, and many legal experts say they will prevail in court.

But Mike Waltz, Trumps ambassador to the United Nations, argued otherwise in an appearance on CNN Sunday morning. Waltz was booked on CNNs State of the Union before the ban was implemented.

The president is absolutely within his rights to limit journalists to government facilities, particularly when, in his opinion, theyre not behaving as good-faith journalists. And thats just not his opinion. Thats the Supreme Courts opinion, Waltz told anchor Dana Bash.

Waltz cited a 1965 Supreme Court ruling, Zemel v. Rusk, in which Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote that the right to speak and publish does not carry with it the unrestrained right to gather information.

But the current dispute centers on a First Amendment legal concept known as viewpoint discrimination, since Trump has been explicit about his reasons for wanting to ban certain outlets over coverage he deems negative.

Courts have forbid viewpoint discrimination and protected the rights of journalists in case after case.

A wide array of reporters have been welcomed onto the White House grounds for many decades. Trumps restrictions are unprecedented. And his own words are likely to be used against him in court.

Something is wrong with a country that can allow people to write purposely negative stories, he said Friday in the Oval Office.

Now, if they want to write them, thats fine, he said. But I dont have to let them into my into the peoples house.

The First Amendment does not permit the government to pick and choose which journalists are allowed to do their jobs, National Press Club President Mark Schoeff Jr. said.

Essentially, courts have ruled that if the White House decides to let in some reporters, then it cant block others for the reasons Trump has cited.

Last year, when Trump briefly banned The Associated Press from some events, a Trump-appointed judge in Washington wrote that when the White House opens its facilities to the press generally, as it does in the Brady Briefing Room, it cannot exclude journalists based on viewpoint.

Republican lawmakers mostly sidestepped the legal concerns when asked about the matter on Sunday interview programs. Instead, they made political arguments.

On ABCs This Week, Sen. Steve Scalise pointed to the presidents sometimes lengthy Q&As with reporters, stating, Ive never seen him turn a question down from anybody. With the ban in place, however, Trump is blocking three news outlets from asking questions.

Democratic elected officials denounced the ban. The president seems to have a real problem with the Constitution, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore said on State of the Union.

Thus, press freedom advocates say they are confident the courts will strike down the current ban.

Theres going to be, in the next few days and probably by first thing Monday morning, filings by these outlets and their legal representation to demand an injunction from a court or hopefully even a temporary restraining order, which would move even faster, insisting that the pool move forward as it normally does, Adam Rose, the deputy director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said on CNN earlier Sunday.

Conor Fitzpatrick, chief supervising attorney at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, warned on ABC that the ban could set a precedent for censorship under future administrations.

Once you open the Pandoras box of censorship, you can never close it again, he said.

Editors of other major newsrooms are well aware that Trump may try to ban their reporters next.

Partly for that reason, news outlets that fiercely compete with CNN, MS NOW and Politico on every other front have shown unusual solidarity.

The Washington Post said in a statement Saturday that the ban is a clear form of intimidation to silence coverage, stripping the public of information and threatening our democracy.

Fox News also showed concern about the ban on Sunday by devoting time to the subject on Fox News Sunday, its weekly public affairs program.

Jacqui Heinrich, who was filling in as anchor, serves as this years president of the White House Correspondents Association, and on Saturday the association said Trumps action violates the First Amendment.

On Sunday, Heinrich interviewed her predecessor, Weijia Jiang of CBS, who led the association for the past year.

It is an absolute privilege to cover the White House and the president, and we dont take that for granted, Jiang said. But when you start selecting whos allowed to do that, the viewpoint shrinks, and it doesnt represent, you know, the public.

And thats what makes America so amazing, she said, the best country in the world, that we can have these differing viewpoints, that we can disagree, that we can bring different perspectives and different reporting to the table and allow people who are watching it and reading it decide for themselves. And so thats why it matters so much.

Idaho News 6

Message History

Delivery option(s)