USA Judge: Pentagon press rules are unconstitutional
In the fight for press freedom in the US, President Donald Trump's government has suffered a legal defeat against critically reporting media such as the New York Times.
21.03.2026, 05:44
SDA
A federal judge in the capital Washington declared the stricter reporting rules for journalists imposed by the Pentagon six months ago to be unconstitutional.
Especially in times of war, it is "more important than ever that the public receive information about what their government is doing - and from a variety of perspectives," said Judge Paul Friedman in his ruling, citing the US military interventions in Venezuela and Iran as examples. A free press is important for all Americans so that they can "support government policies when they want to support them; protest against them when they want to protest; and decide who to vote for in the next election based on full, complete, and freely available information".
The US Department of Defense, now called the War Department, immediately announced that it would appeal the ruling.
Almost all major US media companies opposed the decision
The new guidelines were introduced in October and stipulated that the Pentagon could deny accreditation to reporters who publish information without the department's approval - even if it was not previously classified. Journalists who did not agree to these requirements had to surrender their credentials and leave their jobs at the Pentagon.
Nearly all major US media outlets were opposed: broadcasters such as ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and Fox News as well as newspapers such as the "New York Times" refused to sign the 21-page list of rules issued by the Department of Defense. According to the "Washington Post", only a handful of predominantly right-wing reporters, who are extremely sympathetic to Trump and his government policy, ultimately remained from the once hundreds of accredited reporters.
The New York Times filed a lawsuit against the Pentagon, arguing that the new guidelines violated the constitutionally guaranteed rights of reporters. However, journalists should not be prevented from "doing what journalists have always done: Asking government officials questions and gathering information." Free media reports are not official announcements. The "New York Times" celebrated the judge's ruling as confirmation of its right "to ask critical questions on behalf of the public".
The First Amendment of the US Constitution protects, among other things, freedom of speech, religion and the press. As such, Congress is generally not allowed to pass laws that restrict these freedoms.
"Complex attacks on the freedom of the press"
The Freedom of the Press Foundation welcomed the lawsuit filed by the New York Times and called on other media outlets to follow the example of the renowned newspaper. Trump's administration stands for "multi-layered attacks on press freedom" - and "an attack on the rights of one journalist is an attack on all", the non-profit organization announced in October.
Since Trump's inauguration, the Republican's administration has attempted to restrict the access of independent media with various measures. For example, the composition of the White House press pool has been changed, with agencies such as the Associated Press (AP), Reuters and Bloomberg losing their permanent places. Instead, right-wing bloggers and social media influencers referred to as "new media" were admitted, from whom the government hardly has to fear any critical questions at press conferences. In addition, Trump sued various media outlets for high fines because of their reporting.
