NY Times Sues Pentagon Over Hegseth’s Media Rules
The New York Times has taken the Pentagon to court, filing a lawsuit on Thursday seeking to dismantle the restrictive media rules implemented by War Secretary Pete Hegseth — rules that prompted the mass exile of major mainstream outlets from the building. The paper argues that the policy violates constitutional protections for free speech and due process by granting Hegseth unilateral authority to decide which journalists may be barred. Rather than submit to the revised credentialing requirements, organizations such as the Times walked out.
With those outlets gone, the Pentagon briefing room now consists almost entirely of conservative-leaning publications that agreed to Hegseth’s terms, and their reporters were present at a briefing earlier this week led by his press secretary. Charles Stadtlander, speaking for the Times, condemned the policy outright, saying, “The policy is an attempt to exert control over reporting the government dislikes.” The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Washington.
Pentagon officials did not immediately comment when asked about the litigation.
Even without credentials, the barred news organizations have continued covering defense matters. Over the past week, they led reporting that scrutinized Hegseth’s involvement in a series of U.S. strikes on boats allegedly used by drug smugglers — including one in which a second attack followed after survivors were observed.
Still, the Times maintains that exclusion from the Pentagon undermines its ability to operate effectively. The lawsuit argues that the new system chills reporting by allowing Hegseth to remove journalists whose work he disfavors, even if the reporting contains no classified material. Attorneys for the paper also warned that similar restrictions could spread to other agencies if left unchecked.
For its part, the Pentagon insists the guidelines are nothing more than reasonable safeguards aimed at preventing disclosures that might endanger military personnel. At Tuesday’s briefing, press secretary Kingsley Wilson dismissed the legacy outlets altogether, saying, “The American people don’t trust these propagandists because they stopped telling the truth. So, we’re not going to beg these old gatekeepers to come back and we’re not rebuilding a broken model just to appease them.”
Several major organizations — including CNN, The Associated Press, and The Washington Post — attempted to join that same briefing and were told access was restricted to credentialed press only. The Times is now using Wilson’s “propagandists” remark as proof that the policy discriminates against journalists because of their viewpoints. That is the same legal theory the AP is using in its separate effort to stop President Donald Trump from excluding its journalists from Oval Office and Air Force One events; that case is ongoing in federal court.
The Times’ attorneys argue that their claim is even stronger because their reporters are barred entirely from the Pentagon, whereas AP staff can still enter the White House — albeit not all events. The suit was brought on behalf of the Times and reporter Julian E. Barnes, naming the War Department, Hegseth, and chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell as defendants.
The Pentagon Press Association responded by praising the challenge, calling it a necessary stand. The group said it was heartened by the Times’ willingness to act, stating that the Defense Department’s efforts to control access and limit what accredited reporters may publish “is antithetical to a free and independent press and prohibited by the First Amendment.”
The Times noted that while it moved forward alone to expedite the case, it welcomes other outlets to join the fight as it continues.
{Matzav.com}
