A federal judge ruled Thursday that the Pentagon is unlawfully restricting journalists' access to the U.S. military headquarters, blatantly defying a prior court order to fully restore press credentials.
U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman stated that the Defense Department cannot bypass his earlier ruling by simply issuing a slightly revised "interim" policy. Siding with The New York Times and other media organizations, Friedman wrote that the Pentagon's latest actions were a "blatant attempt to circumvent a lawful order of the Court" and demanded compliance with his previous injunction.
The conflict began last October under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, when the Pentagon introduced a policy threatening to revoke press badges if reporters solicited unauthorized military personnel for classified or certain unclassified information. Reuters reports fifty-five of the 56 news outlets in the Pentagon Press Association refused to sign the agreement, forcing their reporters to surrender their passes.
On March 20, Friedman ruled the original policy violated constitutional protections for newsgathering and due process, ordering the immediate restoration of the credentials.
However, The New York Times, acting as the lead plaintiff, argued that the Pentagon's subsequent replacement rules still violated the court order. The new interim policy required reporters to have escorts while in the building and dictated conditions under which journalists could offer anonymity to sources.
While the Pentagon maintained in court filings that its revised policy corrected the legal defects of the original, the Pentagon Press Association—which represents outlets including Reuters, Fox News, ABC News, and the Times—condemned the ongoing restrictions as "a clear violation of the letter and spirit" of the judge's ruling.
 |
| Pete Hegseth |
On March 20, Friedman ruled the original policy violated constitutional protections for newsgathering and due process, ordering the immediate restoration of the credentials.
However, The New York Times, acting as the lead plaintiff, argued that the Pentagon's subsequent replacement rules still violated the court order. The new interim policy required reporters to have escorts while in the building and dictated conditions under which journalists could offer anonymity to sources.
While the Pentagon maintained in court filings that its revised policy corrected the legal defects of the original, the Pentagon Press Association—which represents outlets including Reuters, Fox News, ABC News, and the Times—condemned the ongoing restrictions as "a clear violation of the letter and spirit" of the judge's ruling.