Jump to content

White House revokes Jim Acosta's press pass


Auburnfan91

Recommended Posts

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/cnn-sues-white-house-to-regain-access-for-reporter-jim-acosta/2018/11/13/afc3423c-e6bf-11e8-bbdb-72fdbf9d4fed_story.html?utm_term=.6a89c79c5a53&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

CNN sues White House to regain access for reporter Jim Acosta

..............Legal experts say the network’s chances of winning in court are favorable. Although a court would likely give the president and Secret Service the benefit of the doubt if they barred a reporter due to security threats, the First Amendment protects journalists against arbitrary restrictions by government officials.

“I think it’s a really strong lawsuit,” Floyd Abrams, a noted First Amendment lawyer, told CNN on Sunday. “I think [CNN] should sue, and if it’s not about Acosta, this is going to happen again . . . So whether it’s CNN suing or the next company suing, someone’s going to have to bring a lawsuit, and whoever does is going to win” unless the White House can show that Acosta is violent and disruptive...............

 

.............Another possible parallel: A federal judge last year struck down Trump’s blocking of critics on Twitter. She ruled that the First Amendment prevented him from denying access to presidential statements due to a would-be follower’s opinions and views.

The same principle applies in the Acosta case, said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which brought the Twitter suit last year.

“The government cannot exclude reporters from [the White House] because of their views,” said Jaffer. “Once the government created a general right of access it cannot selectively withdraw it based on viewpoint. Viewpoint is not a criterion that establishes a media organization’s right to be at a news briefing.”..............

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 251
  • Created
  • Last Reply
35 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

What relief is Acosta seeking? 

"CNN has filed a lawsuit against President Trump and several of his aides, seeking the immediate restoration of chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta's access to the White House."

"In a statement on Tuesday morning, CNN said it is seeking a preliminary injunction so that Acosta can return to the White House right away, and a ruling from the court preventing the White House from revoking Acosta's pass in the future."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

court preventing the White House from revoking Acosta's pass in the future

That may be taking things a bit far.  If Acosta were to show up sling feces like a chimpanzee at the zoo, as opposed to slinging the painful truth at Trump, I think they should have some leeway in revoking his credentials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let him return... Seat him in the back of the room and never call on him to ask a question.

 

First amendment question covered.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HVAU said:

That may be taking things a bit far.  If Acosta were to show up sling feces like a chimpanzee at the zoo, as opposed to slinging the painful truth at Trump, I think they should have some leeway in revoking his credentials.

From the lawsuit:

Quote

The code of federal regulations states that "in granting or denying a request for a security clearance made in response to an application for a White House press pass, officials of the Secret Service will be guided solely by the principle of whether the applicant presents a potential source of physical danger to the President and/or the family of the President so serious as to justify his or her exclusion from White House press privileges."

Basically they just want the current standards upheld and the President prevented under court order from pulling this same stunt again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

What relief is Acosta seeking? 

Does CNN not have anyone other Acosta to ask questions at press briefing? 

 

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

"CNN has filed a lawsuit against President Trump and several of his aides, seeking the immediate restoration of chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta's access to the White House."

"In a statement on Tuesday morning, CNN said it is seeking a preliminary injunction so that Acosta can return to the White House right away, and a ruling from the court preventing the White House from revoking Acosta's pass in the future."

CNN needs  to terminate Acosta and hire a "chief" that wants to do more than harass this administration. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, WDavE said:

Let him return... Seat him in the back of the room and never call on him to ask a question.

 

First amendment question covered.   

Thanks to the Donald, Acosta will be assured a platform - if not a direct response.  ;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Does CNN not have anyone other Acosta to ask questions at press briefing? 

 

CNN needs  to terminate Acosta and hire a "chief" that wants to do more than harass this administration. 

CNN shouldn't be forced to assign someone else to the press briefings.

Trump needs to quit acting like a tittybaby and just answer the damn questions he's asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

CNN shouldn't be forced to assign someone else to the press briefings.

Trump needs to quit acting like a tittybaby and just answer the damn questions he's asked.

Acosta is not there to ask a question. He is there harass and practice showmanship.

President Trump does not have time his nonsense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dug this one up for all here. There isnt one moment in all OF THE SUPPOSED WORST between Trump & Acosta that would warrant credential revocation. 
Remember folks, this is the "Worst Of" Compilation. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

"CNN has filed a lawsuit against President Trump and several of his aides, seeking the immediate restoration of chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta's access to the White House."

"In a statement on Tuesday morning, CNN said it is seeking a preliminary injunction so that Acosta can return to the White House right away, and a ruling from the court preventing the White House from revoking Acosta's pass in the future."

If injunctive relief is not granted, then what? String it out in litigation to try and get a ruling preventing the White House from revoking press passes? That clearly won't work.... 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

CNN shouldn't be forced to assign someone else to the press briefings.

That's a completely irrelevant, irrational, emotionally driven, and meaningless point.  

Gosh some of y'all are completely ignorant of this entire thing. You can't lawfully prevent the White House from revoking a press pass on that basis alone. They gave reasons for their decision. At most he can establish a want of Due Process...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

That's a completely irrelevant, irrational, emotionally driven, and meaningless point.  

Gosh some of y'all are completely ignorant of this entire thing. You can't lawfully prevent the White House from revoking a press pass on that basis alone. They gave reasons for their decision. At most he can establish a want of Due Process...

The President should not, without a situation of extreme misbehavior (violence, threats, total disruption, etc), be able to pick and choose which reporters get to cover him or ask him questions.  It's not irrelevant, emotionally driven, or meaningless.  And I believe ultimately, CNN will be successful in their lawsuit over this (either by court relief or the Trump Administration backing down).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

If injunctive relief is not granted, then what? String it out in litigation to try and get a ruling preventing the White House from revoking press passes? That clearly won't work.... 

Continue to pursue the litigation and get a ruling that enforces the code of federal regulation for this kind of access:

The code of federal regulations states that "in granting or denying a request for a security clearance made in response to an application for a White House press pass, officials of the Secret Service will be guided solely by the principle of whether the applicant presents a potential source of physical danger to the President and/or the family of the President so serious as to justify his or her exclusion from White House press privileges."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

The President should not, without a situation of extreme misbehavior (violence, threats, total disruption, etc), be able to pick and choose which reporters get to cover him or ask him questions.  It's not irrelevant, emotionally driven, or meaningless.  And I believe ultimately, CNN will be successful in their lawsuit over this (either by court relief or the Trump Administration backing down).

Going off that point: should every reporter in the room get to ask questions? If so, how many questions do they ask and why? Can the President be forced to attend these briefings? 

This is somewhat of a rabbit trail, I know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Continue to pursue the litigation and get a ruling that enforces the code of federal regulation for this kind of access:

The code of federal regulations states that "in granting or denying a request for a security clearance made in response to an application for a White House press pass, officials of the Secret Service will be guided solely by the principle of whether the applicant presents a potential source of physical danger to the President and/or the family of the President so serious as to justify his or her exclusion from White House press privileges."

Can you provide a cite for that portion of the code? 

The text reads as if it applies to applicants, which Acosta is not. Thus, "this kind of access" is not being addressed in the quoted Reg. I bet money that these regs were implemented from the Sherrill case, which I addressed earlier in a response to Homer.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Going off that point: should every reporter in the room get to ask questions? If so, how many questions do they ask and why? Can the President be forced to attend these briefings? 

This is somewhat of a rabbit trail, I know. 

I wish there was something in our law that forced every POTUS to hold a minimum one-hour press conference each month with the WH press corps.  Would allow for much more transparency from the WH.  Should every reporter get to ask a question?  Probably not as the time wouldn't be there.  However, most reporters will have similar questions (they talk privately all the time about news), so I think we could glean the major items.  I also don't think that follow up questions should be shot down so quickly by a POTUS, as they are an important function of getting to the truth.

Look, much of this stems from Trump's lack of availability with these traditional press conferences.  He simply doesn't do them, and the daily briefings from Sanders have become increasingly more rare, which then leads to a backlog of questions from reporters.  To expect them not to want to ask a bunch of questions given the scarcity of the situation under this administration is a bit unrealistic.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

CNN shouldn't be forced to assign someone else to the press briefings.

Trump needs to quit acting like a tittybaby and just answer the damn questions he's asked.

What questions were not answered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

I wish there was something in our law that forced every POTUS to hold a minimum one-hour press conference each month with the WH press corps.  Would allow for much more transparency from the WH.  Should every reporter get to ask a question?  Probably not as the time wouldn't be there.  However, most reporters will have similar questions (they talk privately all the time about news), so I think we could glean the major items.  I also don't think that follow up questions should be shot down so quickly by a POTUS, as they are an important function of getting to the truth.

I disagree with the minimum one-hour approach, but I respect your view. (Other posters take note!)

 IMO (is it ok if I say that, Brad?), dissemination of information through technological advancement has fundamentally influenced the quality of information sought. In other words, it seems that access to the White House has extended to a degree where the objective of attaining information is not to primarily glean meaningful news, more than it is to entertain ideology and bicker. We can stipulate the advantages of increased access - i am fine with that. However, let's just think about the disadvantages too. It's no longer seen as something sacred. 

12 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

To expect them not to want to ask a bunch of questions given the scarcity of the situation under this administration is a bit unrealistic.  

I don't think quantitative expectation is a relevant inquiry. I mean, what if a reporter can show with good cause that he/she needs to ask 50 questions? 

Yes, the President is under no obligation to speak with the press, as you highlighted at the beginning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I disagree with the minimum one-hour approach, but I respect your view. (Other posters take note!)

 IMO (is it ok if I say that, Brad?), dissemination of information through technological advancement has fundamentally influenced the quality of information sought. In other words, it seems that access to the White House has extended to a degree where the objective of attaining information is not to primarily glean meaningful news, more than it is to entertain ideology and bicker. We can stipulate the advantages of increased access - i am fine with that. However, let's just think about the disadvantages too. It's no longer seen as something sacred. 

I don't think quantitative expectation is a relevant inquiry. I mean, what if a reporter can show with good cause that he/she needs to ask 50 questions? 

Yes, the President is under no obligation to speak with the press, as you highlighted at the beginning. 

Sure, the WH can disseminate in many capacities now thanks to technology.  The problem though is that those mediums (twitter is prime example) don't allow for push back or accountability.  That's where the physical reporter comes into play, as the follow up question is really key to getting at truth.  Unfiltered and unchecked propaganda from the WH would be a major issue for me, no matter the administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...