Filed on behalf of individual citizens who rely on White House reporting in their teaching, scholarship, journalism, and advocacy, the lawsuit argues that the spaces the government has opened to White House journalists are a “public forum” under the First Amendment. It also argues that the White House’s policy—which the president has described as a “ban on the free press”—unconstitutionally deprives the plaintiffs and the public at large of those journalists’ independent reporting.

“The First Amendment protects the public’s right to know what its government is doing. The White House cannot decide what information Americans receive by punishing critical reporting,” said Katie Fallow, deputy litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute. “When the White House expels reporters because of their coverage and threatens others with expulsion, it isn’t just the press that suffers—the public loses access to independent reporting and gets something closer to government propaganda.”

David A. Schulz, director of Yale Law School’s MFIA and co-counsel in the case, added: “As the Supreme Court has emphasized repeatedly, journalists are the public's ‘eyes and ears’ in spaces they can't access. The president's policy of expelling disfavored journalists harms the public and our democracy.”  

Some of the media organizations that have been targeted under the policy have sued, seeking restoration of their access. The lawsuit filed today differs from those other lawsuits both because it is filed on behalf of ordinary citizens rather than media organizations, and because it seeks broader relief—not just reinstatement of individual media organizations’ access but a broad injunction that would protect the entire White House press corps from the threat of retaliation and protect the public’s access to independent reporting about the president and his policies. 

“The First Amendment reflects a recognition that democracy requires an informed public, and that an informed public requires an independent press,” said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute. “The president’s attack on the independence of the White House press corps should be understood in that light. It’s an attack on the foundations of our democracy.”

The plaintiffs in the case are:

• Kenneth Roth, a human rights advocate, legal scholar, and lecturer at Yale Law School and the Yale Jackson School of Global Affairs.

• Daniel Froomkin, a media and political journalist and editor of Press Watch and Heads Up News.

• Beverly Gage, a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and professor at Yale University.

• Peter Schmidt-Nowara, a civics and social studies teacher at a New York City high school.

• Benjamin Wittes, editor-in-chief of Lawfare and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. 

• Ethan Young, a student at the University of Pennsylvania and editor-in-chief of The Daily Pennsylvanian.

Read statements from the plaintiffs here. 

Read today’s complaint here.

Read more about the case, Roth v. Trump, here.

Today’s lawsuit follows legal challenges brought by the news organizations themselves. On October 13, in a case brought by CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., blocked the White House from barring those three outlets from White House press facilities. The Knight Institute supported the news organizations in that case, joining the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and more than 75 media organizations in an amicus brief. The Institute has also filed three amicus briefs supporting the Associated Press in its challenge to its exclusion from the White House press pool, and it has supported The New York Times in its challenge to restrictions on press access at the Pentagon. 

Lawyers on the case include Katie Fallow, Jameel Jaffer, Jake Karr, Nicola Morrow, and Taylor Fox of the Knight First Amendment Institute, and David A. Schulz and Christina Lee of the Media Freedom & Information Access Clinic at Yale Law School.

For more information, contact: Lorraine Kenny, lorraine.kenny@knightcolumbia.org. 

Kenneth Roth is a human rights advocate, legal scholar, and lecturer at Yale Law School and the Yale Jackson School of Global Affairs.

“Worldwide, I have seen how governmental leaders’ efforts to penalize independent journalists are a prelude to the rise of autocracy,” said Kenneth Roth, a senior fellow at Yale University and former executive director of Human Rights Watch. “The defense of media freedom and access is an essential safeguard of democracy.”

Daniel Froomkin is a media and political journalist and editor of Press Watch and Heads Up News.

“If White House reporters can maintain their access only by staying in Trump’s good graces, they are not free to do their most essential work,” said Dan Froomkin, editor of Press Watch and Heads Up News. “They will not raise the troubling issues that the American people need Trump to address. Other journalists covering Washington—including those of us who carefully observe the interactions between him and the media—will be deprived of the information we need to fulfill our responsibilities as members of a free press.”

Beverly Gage is a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and professor at Yale University.

“As a historian who studies government, politics, national security, and civil liberties, I know that independent journalism is essential for understanding what our government does,” said Professor Beverly Gage, Professor of History at Yale University. “When the White Houseexcludes journalists because it objects to their reporting, it deprives the American people of information they need to hold leaders accountable. It also deprives historians like me, who serve a broad public audience, of the information and knowledge we need to share our work. The real losers in this case are Americans who have been robbed of their ability to receive crucial information about their government.”

Peter Schmidt-Nowara is a civics and social studies teacher at a New York City high school.

“As a social studies teacher, I want my students to have access to accurate, independent reporting about their government,” said Peter Schmidt-Nowara, a high school social studies teacher in New York City. “I’m gravely concerned that the Trump administration’s restrictions on White House reporters are cutting off access to crucial information. I joined this lawsuit because my students deserve to know what’s happening in their government and to hear from a free and independent press.”

Benjamin Wittes is editor-in-chief of Lawfare and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

“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,” said Ben Wittes, editor-in-chief of Lawfare. “Those of us who rely professionally on accurate information about the White House and the presidency need to defend press access vigorously. I’m proud to join the other plaintiffs in standing up for a free press.”

Ethan Young is a student at the University of Pennsylvania and editor-in-chief of The Daily Pennsylvanian.

“The effect of federal policy changes have been acutely felt on college campuses, Penn’s included,” said Ethan Young, editor-in-chief of The Daily Pennsylvanian. “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. Student journalists are better off when more outlets, not fewer, can ask questions of our government. So is our country.”