White House Restricts Wire Services Access in New Policy/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ The Trump White House introduced a new media policy limiting access for wire services like the Associated Press, despite a recent court ruling siding with AP. The move has drawn backlash from media organizations and legal experts, raising concerns over government interference in press freedom. The administration plans to appeal.
White House Restricts Wire Services in New Media Policy: Quick Looks
- New policy limits AP, Reuters, Bloomberg access to President Trump
- Change follows court ruling against AP ban over name dispute
- Press secretary retains control over which reporters question Trump
- Wire services now rotated into limited pool slots with print outlets
- Media groups accuse White House of viewpoint discrimination
- AP says move threatens access for thousands of news outlets
- WHCA warns policy weakens press independence and accountability
- Administration appeals ruling protecting AP’s coverage rights
White House Restricts Wire Services Access in New Policy
Deep Look
WASHINGTON — In a bold reshaping of White House media access, the Trump administration on Tuesday rolled out a new policy restricting wire service access to President Donald Trump, just days after a federal judge ruled the White House had improperly blocked the Associated Press (AP) from covering presidential events.
The updated protocol, shared with select reporters, significantly reduces the guaranteed presence of global wire services like AP, Reuters, and Bloomberg during limited-space events in locations such as the Oval Office and aboard Air Force One.
Traditionally, wire services have held dedicated positions in the press pool, providing fast, nonpartisan reporting to thousands of news outlets worldwide. Under the new policy, they’ll now compete with over 30 print outlets for just two rotating spots, dramatically scaling back their coverage capabilities.
Even within that rotation, the White House made clear that Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt will retain authority to decide who gets access to the president on any given day.
“The administration’s actions continue to disregard the fundamental American freedom to speak without government control or retaliation,” said Lauren Easton, AP’s director of media relations.
Policy Follows Legal Defeat
The move comes on the heels of a legal battle between the White House and the AP, sparked by the administration’s demand that the outlet refer to the “Gulf of Mexico” as the “Gulf of America” — a change the AP refused on editorial grounds.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden ruled last week that the administration violated AP’s First Amendment rights by excluding it from coverage over its editorial decisions. The judge ordered the White House to treat AP equally to other credentialed news organizations.
Yet just a day later, the White House defied the ruling, excluding AP journalists from coverage of a meeting between Trump and El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, in the Oval Office.
Now, with the new policy, the administration appears to be doubling down — seeking to reframe access rules under broader procedural terms while still retaining control over which journalists can engage directly with the president.
Wire Services, Press Groups Push Back
News organizations and journalism advocates quickly denounced the policy.
The White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) criticized the administration’s retention of discretionary control, saying it opens the door to “viewpoint discrimination”.
“The government should not be able to control the independent media that covers it,” said WHCA President Eugene Daniels.
The AP emphasized that wire services serve as a vital backbone for thousands of local newspapers and broadcasters who rely on fast, accurate coverage of national events.
“This policy change impacts communities across all 50 states,” Easton said.
Favoring Friendly Media
The rollout of the policy follows a pattern of increased access for Trump-friendly media outlets. During Tuesday’s press briefing, Leavitt first called on a reporter who opened with praise for the administration before asking two questions.
At a separate event Monday, Trump sharply rebuked CNN’s Kaitlan Collins for her questioning, accusing the network of “hating our country” — in contrast to a more favorable interaction with another journalist present.
While Trump continues to make himself more visibly available to the press than his predecessor, the new restrictions around who can ask questions make access increasingly political — and legally fraught.
Legal Appeals and Photographic Restrictions
Though Tuesday’s new policy focuses on reporters, it notably does not address access for photographers — a key issue in the AP’s lawsuit. At previous court hearings, AP’s chief White House photographer Evan Vucci and correspondent Zeke Miller testified that the ban had crippled the agency’s ability to serve its clients.
Despite McFadden’s ruling, administration lawyers argue that press access is a privilege, not a constitutional right — akin to deciding whom the president chooses for interviews.
“The AP may have grown accustomed to its favored status, but the Constitution does not require that such status endure in perpetuity,” Trump’s legal team wrote in court filings.
The White House is now appealing the ruling, with a federal appeals court scheduled to hear arguments Thursday on whether to pause the decision pending a broader legal review — one that may ultimately head to the U.S. Supreme Court.
While the AP has maintained access to daily press briefings, it has been barred from East Room events for two months — with a lone exception Tuesday when one reporter was allowed into a ceremony involving the Navy football team.
A Pivotal Fight Over Press Freedom
The dispute has sparked concern over growing political interference in the press, particularly regarding efforts to limit access to outlets that challenge official narratives.
Critics say the administration’s actions are an effort to reassert control over presidential image-making, using access as a lever to reward favorable coverage and punish dissent.
As legal arguments play out, the battle now stands as a high-profile clash between the First Amendment’s protections of the free press and a presidential administration seeking to redefine media access on its own terms.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.