Former President Barack Obama said he was “not surprised” by President Donald Trump‘s decision to ban CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, according to CNN, arguing the matter should not be treated as partisan. “You do not have, as far as I can tell, any substantial group of Republicans who are standing up and saying, ‘No, you can’t do that, because we don’t want, if there’s a Democratic president, to be banning Fox News,'”
Obama said Monday during an appearance with historian Doris Kearns Goodwin at Salem State University. “You can’t do that and say that you are still living in a democracy,” he said, describing the situation as one in which “the president of the United States can’t take some criticism.”
Trump announced the ban on social media Sept. 18, stating it followed the outlets’ “constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!” and later characterized it as “a very simple ban.” “I don’t want them in my office. I don’t want them here. I would say the ban would go as far as you can,” he said from the Oval Office. Obama described press freedom as “foundational,” stating, “I am not surprised that the current president wants to ban newscasts that are critical of him, because he’s that guy.”
What Obama’s own record on press access looks like
Obama noted that during his presidency he advocated for greater press freedom abroad, though his own administration faced criticism over press access, including briefly excluding Fox News from a group interview and criticism from the White House Correspondents Association over the release of photographs from a golf outing with Tiger Woods. The Trump White House has cited those incidents in defending its own ban.
The three outlets sued the Trump administration on Sept. 21 seeking restoration of their access. U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, ordered their access temporarily restored in a ruling issued early Thursday, finding the revocation of their press badges was carried out without “constitutionally adequate due process.”
Kelly rejected the administration’s stated national-security justification, writing that “nothing in the record that predates this suit suggests that the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes was motivated by national security concerns.” Kelly noted in his ruling that Trump had instead focused on what the judge described as “the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity” of the outlets’ reporting when he announced the ban.
The temporary restraining order runs for 14 days and isn’t immediately appealable. Even after the ruling, some reporters from the three outlets were initially denied entry to the White House grounds Thursday morning before eventually being let in. Ted Boutrous, an attorney for the outlets, called it “a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law.” The outlet said it had reached out to the Justice Department and the White House for comment.
Kelly cited Sherrill v. Knight, a 1977 D.C. Circuit ruling holding that denying a reporter’s press pass without advance notice, an opportunity to respond, or a written explanation violates due process, according to Reason; he issued a similar ruling in 2018 after the first Trump administration revoked CNN correspondent Jim Acosta’s credentials, a case that ended after the White House restored Acosta’s access and CNN withdrew its suit.
No court has yet ruled on the outlets’ separate First Amendment claims, though White House Correspondents’ Association President Jacqui Heinrich and George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, a Republican-aligned commentator, have both publicly stated the ban raises First Amendment concerns.
Obama also referenced broader solidarity among media organizations after major television networks declined to assume CNN’s White House pool duties following the network’s exclusion. “This one’s actually in the Constitution… Free speech, there’s a reason why it’s the First Amendment,” he said.
“The issue is not the fact that it ultimately will be overturned. The issue is the brazenness with which any president could act like this, and the people in his or her own party not say, ‘No, you cannot do that.’ That lack of guardrails is what I’m most concerned about.”
Published: Sep 25, 2026 01:14 am