Major television networks have officially decided to halt their TV pool coverage of presidential events, a move that comes in direct response to the White House banning CNN, MS NOW, and Politico. The Washington Post noted that this marks a major shift in how the press corps interacts with the Trump administration. By refusing to replace the pool crew, they pointed out that the networks are taking a stand against their decision.
According to a memo written by Bryan Boughton, the Fox News Washington bureau chief and chair of the TV pool, the decision was effective immediately. Per The Washington Post, Boughton wrote to the White House press corps, “This is to advise that, effective today, the TV pool will not be covering events designated as pool coverage of the President.”
He further clarified the networks’ position, stating, “This follows the White House’s position preventing CNN from fulfilling its assigned pool duties. There will be no replacement pool put in place. All other pool coverage will continue as normal, including Congress, VIPs, and selected events in Washington and around the country.”
Fighting for honest journalism
The Washington Post reported that the situation escalated quickly after President Donald Trump announced on Friday, September 18, that he would ban MS NOW, CNN, and Politico from the White House. The president cited his dislike for how these organizations covered him, labeling them as “fake news.” By Saturday, the three outlets were denied access to the White House grounds, and their press passes were confiscated. Barack Obama described the situation as “unimaginable.”
WUSA9 noted that the five major networks, which are ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, and Fox News, issued a joint statement to express their solidarity. “The public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government,” the statement read. “No administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting.”
According to The Washington Post, the banned outlets are suing the government. The complaint alleges violations of First Amendment free press rights and Fifth Amendment due process rights, and the plaintiffs are seeking an expedited hearing.
The joint statement noted: “This morning, we notified the government that we are filing a lawsuit today to protect our First Amendment rights and defend the principle that the government does not decide what the press reports or publishes. Without notice or process, the White House revoked our journalists’ credentials because it objected to our reporting. Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism free from government interference.”
In response to the Press’ anger, Trump just took to Truth Social. He wrote, “The White House is not instituting an assault on the Free Press, something which I cherish. It is instituting an assault on the FAKE NEWS, something that has grown like Cancer in our beloved United States of America. It is corrupt, purposeful, pervasive, fully coordinated, and totally out of control. It is a threat to our National Security, and must be stopped, NOW!”
Politico reported that the removal of the traditional TV pool creates significant logistical hurdles. The pool refers to the press corps that travels with the president. Not only does the system mitigate the high costs of the same, but it is also key to ensuring a live feed in situations where space constraints won’t allow for the presence of every station. This feed is then used by the rest of the pool for reports.
Without a standard pool, Politico noted that there will be very little video coverage of the president unless individual outlets provide their own cameras or use feeds provided by the White House. In the guidance issued by the White House with regard to the president’s trip for the United Nations General Assembly, the pool is not mentioned. Instead, it listed Hearst and the pro-Trump outlet Real America’s Voice as the secondary TV crews.
The legal team representing the plaintiffs, led by First Amendment lawyer Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., is asking a judge to strike down the ban as unconstitutional. Boutrous described the administration’s actions as “a direct assault on the First Amendment and a blatant violation of due process.” The lawsuit references past precedents, including cases involving Jim Acosta, Brian Karem, and Robert Sherrill, where the government was forced to restore access to journalists after similar disputes.
According to WUSA9, Jacqui Heinrich, the president of the White House Correspondents’ Association and a Fox News reporter, also characterized the ban as a First Amendment violation. She emphasized, “The American people, through a free and independent press, must be able to scrutinize those elected to power, regardless of whether government officials view it favorably.”
“That’s why courts have repeatedly held that once the White House provides access to journalists it cannot deny that access arbitrarily or based on the content of their reporting.”
Published: Sep 21, 2026 03:34 pm