The six plaintiffs bring different perspectives to this lawsuit, but share a common concern: the White House’s restrictions on journalists — what President Trump has described as a “ban on the free press”— are depriving the public of independent reporting about the president and his policies. Below, the plaintiffs explain why they joined the case.

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.”