US President Donald Trump has moved against three major news organisations, announcing plans to immediately exclude CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House in a fresh confrontation over how his administration is covered. Trump accused the outlets of repeatedly publishing or broadcasting “fiction or lies”, but did not identify any particular reports that prompted the action.
The announcement came in a Friday Truth Social post in which Trump also warned that more news organisations could face similar treatment. He later called the decision a “very simple ban”, although he did not say whether the measure would stop employees of the three outlets from entering the White House grounds or restrict their access in another way.
Despite the announcement, CNN and Politico reporters remained at the White House shortly afterwards. A CNN crew was also travelling with Vice-President JD Vance to and from an event in Iowa.
CNN strongly rejected Trump's move, describing the threatened ban as an “illegal assault” on press freedoms and saying it would continue supporting its White House journalists.
“We have a right under the US Constitution to do that reporting without hindrance or interference from the government,” the CNN statement said. “Should the ban which President Trump threatened go ahead, it would be an illegal assault on that fundamental and constitutionally-protected right.”
Politico said it would maintain its coverage of the current administration as well as future White Houses.
“We will vigorously defend our First Amendment rights against any attempt to restrict them.”
MS NOW, which was formerly known as MSNBC, declined to comment.
Trump's post said: “Media outlets shouldn't be able to constantly write or report fiction and lies when they're covering the President of the United States, the Trump Administration or the United States of America. Other news outlets to follow.”
He offered no details on the reports he believes justified the move.
The White House Correspondents Association also came out in support of the journalists affected. Its president, Jacqui Heinrich, said the organisation was standing in “defence” of colleagues who “are being singled out for doing their jobs”.
“This is about more than the rights of journalists,” Heinrich, who works for Fox News, said. “It is about the right of the American people to receive a full and independent account of the activities, policies and decisions of whoever occupies the nation's highest office.”
Trump addressed the issue later while speaking to reporters in the Oval Office. He said there was “no reason” the announcement had to be made on Friday afternoon and said it followed years of what he considered unfair coverage.
“It's really just cumulative stories over the last few years,” he said. “You get sick of it.”
The president said “there may be others to join them” but did not identify any additional organisations.
Trump also acknowledged that the decision could end up in court.
“I think it's good to point it out, whether it survives or doesn't,” he said.
The threatened ban has drawn immediate attention from groups that defend press freedom and journalists' rights.
The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University said the White House could not exclude journalists from the press pool because of their views or reporting.
“With so many courts having ruled against him on exactly this point, you'd think President Trump would have learned this lesson by now,” said Jameel Jaffer, the institute's executive director.
“If President Trump means to expel these news organizations from the White House press pool, his action is doubly unconstitutional because the press pool is a 'public forum' under the First Amendment, which means the president can't exclude journalists from it on the basis of their viewpoints,” Jaffer said.
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press said it expected the decision to be challenged in court, arguing that the White House could not select journalists based on their reporting.
“The First Amendment is clear that once the White House invites in some journalists, it can't ban others because it doesn't like their reporting,” said the group's president Bruce Brown, who described the possible ban as “textbook viewpoint discrimination”.
The Freedom of the Press Foundation also criticised the announcement, saying it was illegal and adding: “It's also hard to imagine a dumber move.”
The group said Trump “has been retaliating against the press for years, but it hasn't helped him,” and added that “these outrageous attacks only demonstrate how scared he is of an informed public”.
Trump's latest dispute with the media comes after a series of clashes with White House reporters since he returned to office in January 2025. His administration has also expanded the range of media organisations allowed into the press room, including conservative bloggers and influencers, saying the changes would offer Americans more varied viewpoints.
In February, the White House announced that it would take control of the press pool that gives journalists access to Trump. The pool had previously been managed by the White House Correspondents Association for more than 100 years.
That month, the administration also restricted Associated Press reporters and photographers from areas with limited access, including the Oval Office and Air Force One, over the news agency's continued use of “Gulf of Mexico” rather than “Gulf of America”. The Associated Press filed a lawsuit, which remains before the courts.
Trump has regularly exchanged heated words with reporters at White House events, in the Oval Office and aboard Air Force One, often calling them “fake news” and “rude”.
His first administration also barred CNN correspondent Jim Acosta from the White House before his access was restored following a CNN lawsuit.
CNN is one of five US news organisations that provide video coverage for the presidential press pool. Under the arrangement, an outlet or journalist shares footage from a presidential event with other media organisations, while the BBC contributes to the White House radio pool.
Trump has also pursued lawsuits against several US and international media organisations, including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and the BBC. Some of those cases have ended in multimillion-dollar settlements, while his lawsuit against the BBC is still ongoing.