US appeals court will not lift limits on Associated Press access to White House
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit kept in place a June 6 decision by a divided three-judge panel that the administration could legally restrict access to the AP to news events in the Oval Office and other locations controlled by the White House, including Air Force One.
The D.C. Circuit order denied, opens new tab the AP's request that it review the matter, setting up a possible appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Associated Press in a statement on Tuesday said it was disappointed by the court's decision and will remain focused on free speech rights as the case continues.
"As we've said throughout, the press and the public have a fundamental right to speak freely without government retaliation," the AP said.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.
In a lawsuit filed in February, the AP argued that the limitations on its access imposed by the administration violated the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protections against government abridgment of free speech.
Trump in January signed an executive order officially directing federal agencies to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. The AP sued after the White House restricted its access over its decision not to use "Gulf of America" in its news reports.
The AP Stylebook states that the Gulf of Mexico has carried that name for more than 400 years. AP said that as a global news agency, it will refer to the body of water by its longstanding name while acknowledging the new name Trump has chosen.
Reuters and the AP both issued statements denouncing the access restrictions, which put wire services in a larger rotation with about 30 other newspaper and print outlets. Other media customers, including local news outlets with no presence in Washington, rely on real-time reports by the wire services of presidential statements, as do global financial markets.
The Trump administration has said the president has absolute discretion over media access to the White House.
The AP won a key order in the trial court when U.S. District Judge Treevor McFadden, who was appointed by Trump during his first term, decided that if the White House opens its doors to some journalists it cannot exclude others based on their viewpoints, citing the First Amendment.
The D.C. Circuit panel in its 2-1 ruling in June paused McFadden's order. The two judges in the majority, Neomi Rao and Gregory Katsas, were appointed by Trump during his first term in office. The dissenting judge, Cornelia Pillard, is an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Kristi Noem's DHS is posting 1800s-style ‘fascist propaganda' art to encourage Americans to ‘Protect the Homeland'
The Department of Homeland Security is accused of sharing thinly-veiled nativist propaganda on social media through art as it pursues a sweeping campaign of mass deportations. Throughout July, the X account of the department run by Kristi Noem posted a steady stream of paintings exemplifying a very particular version of the 'homeland.' That has included posting the 1872 work American Progress by John Gast, in which an ethereal Lady Liberty floats above the Western landscape, as white settlers advance across the frame with stage coaches and rail lines, while Native Americans and buffalo run to the margins. Another X post features the contemporary painting A Prayer for a New Life, by Morgan Weistling, a close-up of a white pioneer couple clutching a baby in the back of a covered wagon, along with the caption, ' Remember your Homeland's Heritage.' A third such post includes Morning Pledge, a nostalgic mid-20th century scene of kids in a small town walking towards an American flag, as painted by Thomas Kinkade. The creators and guardians of these works have expressed outrage over being drafted into DHS publicity — and history and politics experts have also raised concerns over this art being used as 'propaganda'. Weistling said he wasn't consulted prior to the Trump administration using his work. The Kinkade Family Foundation, meanwhile, said Morning Pledge was also being used without permission, perverted to 'promote division and xenophobia associated with the ideals of DHS.' The foundation told The Independent that Kinkade, who died in 2012, struggled in life with poverty as a child and substance abuse as an adult. He viewed his paintings, known for their soft, glowing light, as a way to 'imagine a different kind of world, where warmth, safety, and belonging are human rights for all.' Beyond the canvas, Kinkade helped raise millions for the poor, while his foundation has handed out thousands of therapeutic art kits, including in farmworker communities. 'That vision wasn't meant for a select few, but for everyone,' the foundation said in an email. 'Throughout his life, Thomas sought to respond to moments of hardship with compassion and solidarity, standing with communities made vulnerable.T o see his work used in ways that promote exclusion and division betrays the very heart of what he stood for.' The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement that the agency 'honors artwork that celebrates America's heritage and history, and we are pleased that the media is highlighting our efforts to showcase these patriotic pieces.' 'If the media needs a history lesson on the brave men and women who blazed the trails and forged this Republic from the sweat of their brow, we are happy to send them a history textbook,' Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in the statement. 'This administration is unapologetically proud of American history and American heritage.' According to Richard White, a distinguished historian of the West and professor emeritus at Stanford University, DHS's use of works like American Progress is as ironic as it is revealing. The painting depicted a highly nostalgic, mythologized version of the country even at the moment it was created. In reality, instead of the peaceful scene, violence was everywhere, with the U.S. Army (not pictured in the painting) involved in violent, dispossessing wars with indigenous tribes across the West, and groups like the KKK carrying out racist terror campaigns against newly emancipated Black people after the U.S. Civil War. 'It's not about history,' White said of American Progress, but rather a 'mythic narrative' of America. 'The original picture erased the reality around it.' White suspects the Trump administration is using the painting now for a similar purpose. The historian lives in Los Angeles, where masked federal immigration agents and military troops spent weeks conducting dragnet immigration operations, an effort he compares to the Nazi regime's Gestapo secret police. 'The real problem is what's actually happening on the streets of Los Angeles and other cities,' he said. Journalist Spencer Ackerman, author of Reign of Terror: How the 9/11 Era Destabilized America and Produced Trump, sees similar far-right currents in DHS's images, strains of nativism he argues have existed just below the surface at the department since its founding in 2002 after the 9/11 terror attacks. 'It was definitely a crypto-right wing move from the start after 9/11 to use a word like 'homeland' in particular in the context of security,' he told The Independent. Prior to this point, he said, the term 'homeland' was not in mainstream use in this way in the U.S. It had the ring of European-style nationalism (and worse) back then, a poor fit for a pluralist democracy in which most of the population, at some point in history, came from somewhere else. Trump's DHS, however, has taken this implicit ideology to the explicit extreme, Ackerman argued, using the tools of 'far-right internet culture' to provoke people by using jarring memes plus the 'classic fascist propaganda' of armed agents kicking in doors to arrest mostly non-white people. 'This is a turn. This is different,' he said. 'This is very racialized, very essentialized propaganda that DHS did not previously explicitly traffic in, even if this probably reflects the id of the Department of Homeland Security that whole time.' The administration's immigration PR efforts have extended beyond the DHS X account and its selection of pioneer paintings. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has earned the derisive nickname ' ICE Barbie ' from critics for her frequent photo-ops in cowboy oufits and combat-ready gear matching with the various agencies under her purview. Both Trump and Noem have featured in wartime-style recruiting posters urging viewers to 'Defend the Homeland, Join ICE Today,' as the administration offers $50,000 sign-on bonuses for new ICE officers. Trump has long leaned into a nostalgic aesthetic as a notable part of his politics. One of his final executive orders in 2020 involved a demand that all new federal buildings in Washington be built in the ' beautiful ' neo-classical style, with marble and columns meant to evoke the temples of ancient Greece and Rome, while his signature political slogan, 'Make America Great Again,' includes an unmistakable nod to a heroic past. Government officials have long trafficked in tropes and propaganda about disfavored groups, too, White said, pointing to the virulently racist popular depictions of the Japanese during WWII. What stands out in this present era, however, is the seeming commitment of whole government departments to producing such images. In time, however, White said even these purposely exclusionary images of national propaganda reveal their limitations. 'In myth, nothing ever changes,' he said. 'In history, things do change.'
The Guardian
31 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The simple way Democrats should talk about Trump and Epstein
Democrats must not let Jeffrey Epstein die. They must highlight how this saga exposes the president for who he has always been. In the decade Teflon Don has spent on the national stage, no scandal has stuck to and haunted him quite so viscerally as the Epstein affair. He's never before appeared so flustered, forced to answer question after question about the women and girls whose lives were destroyed by his former 'best friend'. The world may never know what is inside the so-called 'Epstein files.' What is clear is that the contents are damaging enough for the president and his human flak jackets to call the whole affair a 'hoax', recess Congress to prevent a vote on releasing the materials and send the deputy attorney general to visit Tallahassee, Florida, to speak to the convicted child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, who was subsequently moved to a 'cushy', celebrity-riddled minimum security prison in Bryan, Texas. As the conservative pundit Bill Kristol noted over the weekend: '[Richard Nixon] said of Watergate, 'I gave them a sword. And they stuck it in, and they twisted it with relish.' Trump may have given us a sword. We should use it.' Kristol is right, to a point. Liberals, progressives and never-Trump Republicans must not let voters forget Trump's festering, open wound without neglecting the kitchen table, cost-of-living matters that hurt them last fall. In 2007, a far sharper and far more spry Joe Biden delivered a quip so clever and cutting that it ended another man's entire political career. Rudy Giuliani was never able to recover after Biden observed how it seemed 'there's only three things he mentions in a sentence: a noun, a verb, and 9/11'. The line was funny because it was true; it was lethal because it exposed the emptiness behind the former New York City mayor's tragedy-fueled candidacy. This is the challenge for Democrats: how do they maintain a spotlight on a scandal that reveals Trump for who he is in a way that finally resonates with his base without appearing to exploit a tragedy , à la Giuliani? They must ground the abstract conspiracy in everyday terms relatable to the average American. It goes like this: Trump protects elites. Say it in every stump speech, vent about it in vertical videos and keep it alive as a dominant narrative in the zeitgeist. Do not back away. The modern media environment rewards repetition and omnipresence, so Hakeem Jeffries should promise an Epstein select committee, Chuck Schumer should make Republicans release the Epstein files in return for votes to fund the government, and every leftwing activist in the country should be burying Pam Bondi's justice department in a blizzard of Freedom of Information Act requests. In doing so, recognize that the response to the scandal is an encapsulation of a deeper truth that voters already feel. The president and the GOP protect the elite at the expense of ordinary Americans. Savvier Democrats get this. Some of the party's best communicators have already been grasping for a message along these lines, as seen in the focus on Elon Musk's 'department of government efficiency' (Doge) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders's nationwide Fighting Oligarchy tour. But while those efforts have paid some political dividends, they have not come close to capturing the public imagination to the degree the Epstein files have. For at least some portion of the Maga movement, the past three weeks have finally managed to expose Trump for the hobnobbing, name-dropping, pompous ass that he's always been. Why is this one particular story so effective – especially as most voters have known Trump to be a plutocratic wannabe for decades? Maggie Haberman's hypothesis is noteworthy: New York high society operates in two concentric circles. The Big Apple has a glittering 'elite' with status at the center of a broader ring that wields power. Trump has always tried to straddle those rings, painting himself as the renegade billionaire. The Epstein affair shatters that mythos. It casts him not as a brash, bull-in-a-china-shop outsider but as the ultimate insider, rubbing shoulders with the very aristocracy his campaign rhetoric promised to upend. Democrats must lead with Epstein. Then they need to connect it to the president's myriad failures. Why did Trump cut taxes for the richest Americans while cutting Medicaid in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act? For the same reason he is protecting Epstein and his buddies. Why is Trump risking union jobs in auto manufacturing so he can have a trade spat with Mexico and Canada? For the same reason he is protecting Epstein and his buddies. Why is Donald Trump talking about firing the head of the Fed? For the same reason he is protecting Epstein and his buddies. Mallory McMorrow of Michigan, a Democratic Senate candidate, is already reading from this script. In recent weeks, she has demonstrated mastery in pairing Epstein with broader anti‑elite rhetoric. In one vertical video, she emphatically declared: This is exactly why there's eroding trust in our institutions, because until we confront the rot that exists in our institutions, until we hold everyone, everyone accountable under the same set of rules and laws, we will keep living in a country where there are two systems of justice, one for the rich and powerful, and one for everybody else. We deserve better. Release the files now. Trump's friendship with Epstein is a proof point for elite favoritism and all of us who oppose the orange god king must use it to condemn inequality and unaccountable power within the GOP ecosystem. The Epstein scandal has captured our attention not just because it's a lurid horror story, but because it confirms a truth people already believe: the rich view them as objects for exploitation. And if there's one thing Trump has successfully messaged to all Americans, it's that he's very, very rich. Epstein is the story. But he is also a stand-in for every closed maternity ward in a rural county, for every mom choosing between insulin and groceries and for every veteran battling the Department of Veterans Affairs while Silicon Valley billionaires buy senators. Democrats' message is simple enough, actually: 'Trump and the GOP protect the elite. They abandon you.' Think this messaging can be overdone? Look no further than Benghazi, a truly made-up scandal, which Republicans turned into a true political liability with Hillary Clinton's emails. That story stuck because of repetition and omnipresence, but also because it struck a chord with something Americans already believed: that the Clinton family viewed themselves as above accountability. Even Trump's own supporters are asking hard questions. Where are the files? Why is there a two-tiered system of justice? Why is Trump more interested in protecting his friends than releasing the truth? The Democratic response should be a noun, a verb and Jeffrey Epstein, and then the rot at the core of the American system. Deployed effectively, it can be as impactful and as memorable as Trump's cruel but devastating 2024 attack line: 'Kamala is for they / them, President Trump is for you.' Trump protects elites. That's why Trump is protecting Epstein's circle. But who's protecting you? Peter Rothpletz is a Guardian contributor
Telegraph
39 minutes ago
- Telegraph
White House backs anti-Islam preacher in two-tier policing row
The Trump administration is backing a controversial Christian preacher at the centre of a 'two-tier' policing row over his right to criticise Islam, The Telegraph can reveal. Dia Moodley, a father of four, met US officials dispatched to interview British 'victims of censorship' amid growing concern in Washington that free speech in the UK is under threat. In the past four years, the evangelical pastor, from Bristol, has been the subject of repeated enforcement action by Avon and Somerset Police over his street preaching, which includes comparisons between Christianity and Islam, as well as sermons on abortion and homosexuality. In his preaching, Mr Moodley says Islam is 'lies' and 'darkness', while Christianity is 'light'. He contrasts the Bible, which he says is 'the truth', with the Koran, which he claims is 'not true'. In one public sermon in 2024 he stated his belief that there are differences between 'the moral standards of the God of Islam and the Christian God.' Street preaching is a visible part of religious life in the US, especially in the South and Midwest. But in the UK, it is less socially accepted, and even viewed as a public nuisance. In 2021, Mr Moodley was banned from 'passing comment' on any faith other than Christianity and from giving sermons without police approval. It can now be revealed that the pastor, 58, was among the activists who met US State Department diplomats during their fact-finding mission to the UK in March. Until now, it was only confirmed that the US delegation met five anti-abortion activists charged over prayer vigils outside clinics, including Livia Tossici-Bolt, convicted in April for protesting in Bournemouth. The others were Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, Rose Docherty, Adam Smith-Connor and Father Sean Gough, who all described being detained for silent prayer. Mr Moodley's inclusion appears to be further evidence of the Trump administration's willingness to interfere in UK domestic affairs, potentially broadening its free speech concerns from buffer zone legislation to broader allegations that Christians are being silenced while other faiths, including Islam, are appeased. 'Free speech in crisis' In an interview with The Telegraph, Mr Moodley said he was 'pleased' to be invited to meet a five-person US State Department team in London on March 19. 'We've been crying out here in the United Kingdom for quite a few years now, especially over the last year or two. Our position has been that free speech is in crisis,' he said. 'So when the US State Department came and said they wanted to sit across the table from us and hear directly what we were going through, it felt like what our own government needed to do – to sit down with us and ask what is actually happening on the ground, rather than hearing our Prime Minister saying 'free speech has always been here',' he added, referring to Sir Keir Starmer's comments to JD Vance, the vice president, in February. Asked whether he feared being used as a political pawn, Mr Moodley said his only concern was that the UK free speech crisis had 'caught the attention of somebody else'. The meeting was facilitated by ADF International UK (ADFI), the British arm of an American Right-wing Christian group, which had been contacted by US State Department officials seeking to speak with 'victims of censorship in the UK'. Its US partner, Alliance Defending Freedom, lobbied to overturn Roe v Wade in 2022 – a ruling that triggered abortion bans in 13 states. Since then, the group has shifted focus to Britain, funnelling £1.1 million into its UK arm last year for campaigning and related activity. Mr Moodley, who is a client of ADFI, told US State Department officials how, in October 2021, police banned him from 'passing comments on any other religion or comparing them to Christianity'. The order also barred him from 'delivering a sermon or religious address at a time or place that has not had prior consent and approval of Avon & Somerset Constabulary'. 'Being able to compare is part of the Christian methodology to get the message out, and here we have the police saying 'you can't do that, and if you do that, we could possibly arrest you',' Mr Moodley said. With support from ADFI, in December 2021 he successfully challenged the order. After further litigation, the force admitted in February 2024 the restrictions had been 'disproportionate'. 'Christians treated less favourably' Unlike other activists who met the delegation, Mr Moodley's main concern is 'two-tier policing'. He claims Christians are treated less favourably than Muslims with the most recent incident taking place in Bristol on March 22, just days after his meeting with the State Department. While giving a sermon, Mr Moodley compared Islamic and Christian teachings, which provoked an angry response from Muslim passers-by. 'I held up in my one hand my Bible and my copy of the Koran – it's my own personal copy of the Koran, in which all my notes are, my pages are highlighted, and stuff that I've studied in the Koran – and a man literally said to me, as he walked across from the shopping precinct, 'if you do not stop right now, I'm going to stab you',' he claimed. What happened next was captured on video and shared with The Telegraph. 'Three other men came up, identified as Muslims, and said to me they want my Koran. Their words to me were, 'this is not your book'. Meaning it's a book of their faith, and they tried to grab it from me.' He said: 'They made every attempt to grab it to such a point, imposing themselves upon me in a very dangerous way, where they pushed me off the ladder, I could have knocked my head on the sign board behind me.' Mr Moodley continued: 'The police arrived on the scene whilst these men were there, and did nothing about it. It smells of two-tier policing. It smells of the fact that there was a Muslim crowd there, and they did not want to upset this Muslim crowd.' He was told by Avon and Somerset Police on July 21 they would not pursue charges against the individual who allegedly threatened him. In a statement, Avon and Somerset Police confirmed that following the incident on March 22, a man in his 20s attended a voluntary interview. No further action was initially taken, but after Mr Moodley submitted a victim's right to review, the case was reconsidered and referred to the CPS. A force spokesman added: 'The process is ongoing and therefore this remains a live police investigation. This has been recorded as a public order incident and a hate crime.' Mr Moodley is also considering fresh legal action against the force, supported by the ADFI, over what he claims is institutional hostility toward his Christian faith.
