The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-1 on June 6, 2025, that President Trump could continue barring Associated Press journalists from "restricted presidential spaces" including the Oval Office and Air Force One, temporarily blocking a lower court order that had required restoration of AP access.
Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, authored the majority opinion joined by Judge Gregory Katsas, also a Trump appointee. Rao concluded that the injunction "impinges on the President's independence and control over his private workspaces" and that the administration would likely prevail in the underlying lawsuit. The ruling held that "restricted presidential spaces are not First Amendment fora opened for private speech and discussion" and that "the White House therefore retains discretion to determine, including on the basis of viewpoint, which journalists will be admitted."
Judge Cornelia Pillard, an Obama appointee, dissented sharply, writing that the majority's ruling contradicts "any sensible understanding of the role of a free press in our constitutional democracy."
The decision reversed U.S. District Judge James Boasberg's April 8 order requiring the White House to restore AP access after finding the original ban constituted viewpoint-based discrimination in violation of the First Amendment. The AP had been banned since February 11 over its refusal to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the "Gulf of America" in its reporting.
The ruling's most dangerous implication was its explicit endorsement of viewpoint-based exclusion: by holding that the president retains discretion to select journalists "including on the basis of viewpoint," the D.C. Circuit created a framework in which any president could exclude news organizations whose coverage they disliked. This doctrine, if sustained, would effectively nullify First Amendment protections for press access to the executive branch, converting presidential coverage from a right into a privilege conditioned on editorial compliance.