Judge weighs New York Times bid to block policy limiting journalists’ Pentagon access
WASHINGTON– A Pentagon policy limiting journalists’ access to the building deprives Americans of vital information about U.S. military operations while the country is at war, a New York Times lawyer argued Friday as he urged a judge to block the new rules.
“It’s more important than ever that the public knows as much as possible,” Times attorney Theodore Boutrous told U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman during the first hearing in the newspaper’s lawsuit against the Defense Department.
Friedman did not immediately rule on whether to order the Pentagon to reinstate the press credentials of journalists who left the building last October rather than accept the new rules. But the judge’s remarks suggest he was skeptical of the government’s main arguments in defense of the policy.
Friedman, who was appointed to the bench by Democratic President Bill Clinton, suggested that it is “more important than ever” for Americans to hear “a variety of perspectives” on the activities of the federal government and its elected leaders.
“Many things need to be strictly and secure, but openness and transparency allows members of the public to know what their government is doing,” the judge said.
Justice Department attorney Michael Bruns said the accreditation policy reflects the government’s “compelling interest” and “legal obligation” to protect national security information.
“This is not a trivial exercise,” argued Bruns.
Friedman said he intended to issue “a decision as quickly as possible, because I know it is important for many reasons.”
The Times sued the Pentagon and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in December, claiming the accreditation policy violates journalists’ constitutional rights to free speech and due process.
Times spokesman Charles Stadtlander said the U.S. attacks on Iran — and the resulting deaths of U.S. soldiers — “highlight the public’s right to access in-depth, unbiased reporting on the details of military actions unfolding as we speak.”
“Today was an important opportunity for New York Times lawyers to make the case for the importance and public service of allowing journalists to fully cover the Pentagon,” Stadtlander said in a statement.
The current Pentagon press corps is comprised primarily of conservative media outlets who have accepted this policy. Media reporters who refused to accept the new rules, including from the Associated Press, continued to cover the military from outside the building.
The AP, meanwhile, is awaiting a ruling from a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court of Appeals on its separate lawsuit against the Trump administration. The AP says Trump’s team punished him by reducing his access to presidential events because the media outlet did not follow the president’s lead in renaming the Gulf of Mexico.
The Pentagon has argued that the policy imposes “common sense” rules that protect military personnel from disclosing national security information.
“The purpose of this process is to prevent those who pose a security risk from having broad access to U.S. military headquarters,” the government lawyers wrote.
Lawyers for the Times say the policy is intended to silence media coverage unfavorable to President Donald Trump’s administration.
“The First Amendment categorically prohibits government from granting itself unfettered power to restrict free speech, because the mere existence of such arbitrary authority can lead to self-censorship,” they write.
The Times says the Pentagon has applied its own rules inconsistently. The newspaper said Trump ally Laura Loomer, a right-wing figure who has subscribed to Pentagon policies, appeared to violate the ban on soliciting unauthorized information by promoting her “tip line.”
The government did not object to Loomer’s “general tip line” but concluded that a Washington Post tip line violated its policy because it purported to “target” military personnel and department employees.
___
AP Media Writer David Bauder in New York contributed to this story.
