Trump White House Harassment of the Associated Press Cannot Stand

News organizations must present a united front against an attempt to stifle the free press

It was only a matter of time.

The Trump White House placed unconstitutional restrictions on the Associated Press last week, when it barred the AP from the Oval Office and Air Force One over the outlet’s policy of continuing to call the Gulf of Mexico by its actual name, clearly violating the news organization’s First Amendment right to freedom of the press.

The Jim Acosta Show is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Shortly after returning to the White House, Trump announced a name change for the expansive body of water to the “Gulf of America,” an absurd new salvo in the president’s culture wars.

Don’t be fooled by pundits who dismiss the controversy as inside-the-Beltway navel-gazing. The matter remains a crucial test for the free press in the U.S. Bow to the demands of the president and news organizations will signal that Trump suddenly can control the flow of information in American society. Refuse to buckle to Trump’s actions and journalists will suffer the consequences.

It’s a simple choice: the truth or access.

The AP chose wisely and stood its ground by calling the Gulf of Mexico by its name for centuries. For that, the venerable news cooperative paid a price, losing its spot in the coveted pool of reporters permitted to cover the president in the Oval Office and on trips aboard Air Force One. That access is critical for the AP which supplies wire reports to outlets around the world, in the same way Reuters and Bloomberg inform millions of news readers.

Late last week, Deputy White House chief of staff Taylor Budowich announced in an Orwellian social media post that the AP would be banished from its position in what reporters refer to as “the pool,” over its editorial decision to stick with the Gulf of Mexico.

“The Associated Press continues to ignore the lawful geographic name change of the Gulf of America. This decision is not just divisive, but it also exposes the Associated Press' commitment to misinformation,” Budowich said on X.

“While their right to irresponsible and dishonest reporting is protected by the First Amendment, it does not ensure their privilege of unfettered access to limited spaces, like the Oval Office and Air Force One. Going forward, that space will now be opened up to the many thousands of reporters who have been barred from covering these intimate areas of the administration. Associate Press journalists and photographers will retain their credentials to the White House complex,” he added.

It’s a waste of time dissecting Budowich’s nonsensical post, which is an obvious lie and just the latest example of Trumpian projection. The AP is not spreading disinformation. Trump is. Therefore, this brazen White House attempt to suppress a prominent news organization must be stopped.

When I asked acclaimed First Amendment attorney Ted Boutrous whether the administration’s action violated the AP’s constitutional protections, he immediately sent a one-word response: “absolutely!” Full disclosure: Boutrous represented me in my case against the president during the first Trump administration, when officials at the White House seized my press pass, following a news conference in November 2018. Days later, a Trump-appointed federal judge sided with me and my news organization, stating that I had suffered “irreparable harm” because of the suspension of my credentials.

It was a case about "the liberties of the individual journalists themselves," Judge Timothy J. Kelly said in his decision granting a temporary restraining that ordered the White House to restore my press pass. More on that here: Acosta press pass case

Back at the White House after my press pass was restored by a federal judge in November 2018. Photo by William Moon.

Protections under the First Amendment were not the only issue in the case. My rights to due process under the Fifth Amendment were also under assault. Simply put, the White House had never informed journalists of the rules of the road that could put press credentials in jeopardy. Without such guidelines, the administration could easily target journalists it did not like. At one point during the case, the Justice Department’s own lawyers attempted to argue that the White House could determine who covers the president, a chilling precedent had Trump been successful.

A legal case along similar lines could be brewing in the dispute between the AP and the Trump White House. It is hard to imagine a scenario in which the administration could conceivably lay out legally binding rules for reporters dictating how news outlets cover presidential decrees like renaming the Gulf of Mexico. Budowich referred to a “lawful geographic name change” in his statement on the AP. Sorry. That doesn’t require journalists to call it the “Gulf of America.”

The AP has taken the right approach, stating what is at stake in this rhetorical battle over the Gulf of Mexico.

“Freedom of speech is a pillar of American democracy and a core value of the American people. The White House has said it supports these principles. The actions taken to restrict AP’s coverage of presidential events because of how we refer to a geographic location chip away at this important right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution for all Americans,” AP vice president of corporate communications Lauren Easton said in a statement.

As I found covering the first Trump White House, this is more than just another case of the president and his team being petty and vindictive. It’s also an effort designed to divide the D.C. press corps. Unfortunately, some news outlets have adopted the “Gulf of America” name change. As has Google, deservedly inviting scorn from the search engine’s users.

More to the point, it is crucial for news outlets to unite in opposition to any attempts by the administration to harm individual journalists and their organizations. The White House Correspondents Association’s president, Eugene Daniels released a statement in support of the AP, saying “the White House cannot dictate how news organizations report the news.” WHCA on AP

Reporters and their bosses, however, need to do more. For starters, the AP should consider challenging the White House harassment of its reporters in court. News outlets then must rally to the cause, by offering supportive statements to the court hearing the case, writing op-Ed’s backing the AP, and, if necessary, refusing to cover presidential movements in solidarity, until Trump backs down.

Trump may respond by inviting only sycophants and right-wing hacks to chronicle his daily decrees. Fine. Let the American people soak that in - the image of an aspiring autocrat and his servile propagandists.

Just last week, Vice President J.D. Vance lectured European leaders, specifically Germany, against the idea of “firewalls” barring extreme right-wing parties, describing such policies as an attack on free speech.

“Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters,” Vance said in a speech at the Munich Security Conference.

Tell that to the president. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt has vowed that Trump will be the "most transparent and accessible president in American history.” That accessibility appears to come with conditions.

News organizations in Washington should be banding together to send the message that members of the press will determine how they cover the news. Not the White House. Not the man behind the Resolute Desk, no matter how he redraws the world’s maps. The presidential Sharpie is not mightier than the pen.

According to its website, the AP was founded in 1846 and now boasts a team of journalists in nearly 100 countries, with a whopping 4 billion people seeing its journalism every day. Its mission: “accurate, fact-based, nonpartisan reporting.”

I can’t think of a better cause to rally around.