In a closely watched legal fight over press freedom and presidential access, a federal appeals court on Friday handed The Associated Press (AP) an incremental loss in its effort to regain full access to President Trump’s events.

By a 2-1 vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington sided with the Trump administration, granting a stay that pauses enforcement of a lower court ruling. That ruling had found the administration improperly punished AP for its reporting—specifically, for continuing to use the term “Gulf of Mexico” instead of Trump’s preferred “Gulf of America.”

What’s the Issue?

AP, a news agency with a nearly 180-year history and global reach, had long been part of the “pool” of reporters allowed to cover the president in tight quarters like the Oval Office and aboard Air Force One. But in February, after AP refused to adopt Trump’s renaming of the Gulf of Mexico, the administration reduced the news outlet’s access, cutting back the presence of AP reporters at these key events.

The Court’s Take

Judges Gregory G. Katsas and Neomi Rao, both Trump appointees, ruled that the president has broad discretion to decide who can enter private spaces like the Oval Office and Air Force One. Crucially, they agreed that Trump could consider a journalist’s viewpoint in making these decisions — a legal principle known as “viewpoint discrimination.”

Judge Rao explained, “If the president sits down for an interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, he is not required to do the same with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.” The majority opinion emphasized that the First Amendment does not limit the president’s choice of whom to speak with or grant special access.

The stay will remain in place while the court prepares for a full appeal review, likely several months away, when a different panel of judges will hear the case.

The Dissent

Judge Cornelia T.L. Pillard, appointed by former President Obama, strongly disagreed. In her dissent, she warned that allowing the president to exclude journalists based on viewpoint sets a dangerous precedent. She pointed out that this reasoning could lead future administrations to only permit friendly media outlets into press spaces—Republicans favoring Fox News, Democrats favoring MSNBC.

“Each and every member of the White House press corps would hesitate to publish anything an incumbent administration might dislike,” Pillard wrote. She argued there’s no sound reason to treat the Oval Office as exempt from standard First Amendment protections against viewpoint discrimination.

A Longstanding Struggle Between Trump and the Press

The tussle between Trump and the media has been ongoing. Since the initial ruling, the White House has implemented a rotation system for smaller events, usually including AP photographers but limiting text reporters’ presence. Meanwhile, Trump has engaged more frequently with small, friendly media groups in the Oval Office rather than holding traditional press conferences, where AP journalists typically attend.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt celebrated the court’s ruling on social media, calling it a “VICTORY!” and claiming it opens access to a broader range of media beyond the “failing legacy media.” Trump himself posted on Truth Social, mocking AP for refusing to adopt his term “Gulf of America” and branding them “FAKE NEWS.”

What’s Next?

AP spokesman Patrick Maks expressed disappointment with the ruling and said the organization is exploring its options, including seeking expedited review of the full case.

As the legal battle continues, the case raises significant questions about the balance between the president’s authority over access to private presidential spaces and the fundamental free-press protections enshrined in the First Amendment.

Judge Rao’s majority opinion summed up the stakes: “The Oval Office is the President’s office, over which he has absolute control and discretion to exclude the public or members of the press.”

Source: AP News – Appeals court hands AP an incremental loss in its attempt to regain its access to Trump events

The post Appeals Court Sides with Trump in AP’s Fight Over Press Access appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a sharp rebuke Friday, PBS CEO Paula Kerger called former President Donald Trump’s latest executive order cutting federal funding to PBS and NPR “blatantly unlawful” and a direct threat to public access to educational programming.

Kerger said the order endangers PBS’s mission to serve the American public—a role it’s played for over five decades.

“We are currently exploring all options to allow PBS to continue to serve our member stations and all Americans,” she added.

Trump signed the order late Thursday, accusing PBS and NPR of spreading “radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news.’” The directive instructs federal agencies and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) to halt all funding to the public media giants and investigate any indirect public support they might receive.

The White House amplified the move on social media, stating that taxpayer money should not fund what it labeled biased media content.

In response, the CPB, which channels federal funds to local PBS and NPR stations, argued that it isn’t a federal agency and therefore not subject to the president’s directive. Just days earlier, Trump attempted to remove three of the CPB’s remaining five board members—a move the CPB swiftly challenged in court, saying it would paralyze the organization’s ability to function.

While PBS and NPR are national networks, most of the public funding flows directly to hundreds of local affiliate stations, many of which operate in small or rural communities. These stations often rely heavily on a mix of public funds, donations, and philanthropic grants to stay on the air. Experts warn that Trump’s proposal could cripple the smaller stations most dependent on federal support.

Although public broadcasting has faced repeated budget threats from Republican leaders over the years, local support often helped it weather those storms—few lawmakers want to be blamed for killing off a station in their own district. But many insiders view this current effort as the most serious existential threat the public media system has ever faced.

The funding cut is the latest in a string of aggressive moves by Trump’s administration to clamp down on institutions he perceives as hostile or left-leaning. Since taking office for a second term in January, Trump has removed leadership from major cultural institutions, including the Kennedy Center and the National Endowment for the Humanities, slashed arts and education grants, and sought to punish universities and law firms promoting diversity initiatives.

Just two weeks ago, the White House previewed a $9.1 billion package of proposed cuts—one that includes defunding the CPB altogether. That proposal has yet to be formally introduced in Congress.

Trump’s administration is also targeting U.S.-funded international news agencies like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, once seen as global models of independent journalism. Efforts to dismantle these outlets have sparked legal battles, with federal courts pushing back and suggesting that the administration may be exceeding its authority by withholding congressionally approved funding.

Source: AP News – PBS chief decries Trump’s executive order directing federal funding cuts to PBS and NPR as unlawful

The post PBS Chief Blasts Trump’s Order to Cut Public Media Funding appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.