Pentagon press policy ruled unconstitutional in case brought by N.Y. Times

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Washington Post

Updated March 20, 2026 at 5:49 p.m. EDT


A federal judge in Washington, D.C., struck down the Defense Department’s controversial press policy as unconstitutional Friday, ruling in favor of the New York Times and one of its reporters, Julian E. Barnes.

U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman said in his ruling that the ongoing war with Iran made it “more important than ever that the public have access to information from a variety of perspectives about what its government is doing.”

The policy, introduced in October, stated that the Pentagon could revoke the credentials of any journalist who solicited information that the department did not explicitly authorize for release — even if that information was unclassified. The policy led to a mass exodus of journalists from dozens of news organizations who refused to sign, including the Times and The Washington Post. Only a handful of the hundreds of formerly credentialed members of the media signed the updated agreement.

A cohort from largely right-wing outlets sympathetic to President Donald Trump signed on to the new policy, including far-right activists Laura Loomer and Jack Posobiec, as well as former congressman Matt Gaetz. Representatives for the Defense Department and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2026/03/20/pentagon-press-policy-unconstitutional-nyt/

---

[link:https://wapo.st/4t0fjcVNo paywall] (gift)

Link to ORDER (PDF) - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.287334/gov.uscourts.dcd.287334.34.0_3.pdf


Article updated.

Original article -

March 20, 2026 at 5:18 p.m. EDT


A federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled on Friday that the Defense Department's controversial press policy was illegal, striking it down as unconstitutional in a lawsuit brought by the New York Times and one of its reporters, Julian E. Barnes.

The policy, introduced in October, stated that the Pentagon could revoke the credentials of any journalist who solicited information that the department did not explicitly authorize for release -- even if that information was unclassified.

U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman ruled that the policy violated the U.S. Constitution's protections of press freedom and due process under the First and Fifth Amendments.


This is a developing story and will be updated.

[Jim__]

1. Good news! The more the courts oppose this administration, the better.

[mobeau69]

3. It's not opposing the administration, it's upholding The Constitution.

Same difference though.

[Attilatheblond]

7. Making journalism legal again!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

2. Trump Administration Handed Legal Loss Over Pentagon Press Policy

This makes me smile

Link to tweet

https://www.newsweek.com/judge-blocks-trump-pentagon-press-access-rules-11713830

A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from enforcing parts of a new Pentagon policy that limits reporters’ access to the Defense Department, ruling that key provisions unlawfully restrict press credentials.

U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman in Washington sided with The New York Times, which challenged the policy after reporters were told they would lose their credentials if they left the Pentagon rather than agree to the new rules. Friedman, appointed by former Democratic President Bill Clinton, ruled that the policy illegally penalized journalists for refusing to comply with the restrictions.

The newspaper sued the Pentagon and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in December, arguing that the credentialing changes violated reporters’ constitutional rights to free speech and due process. The judge agreed that the policy, as applied to reporters who declined to accept the new terms, could not be enforced.

The Pentagon’s current press corps is now largely made up of conservative outlets that agreed to the policy. Reporters from organizations that refused to consent to the new rules, including The Associated Press, have continued covering the military despite the dispute.

This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.

[BumRushDaShow]

4. I expect the appeals and appeals

[Bev54]

5. Great!! At a critical time as well. Will they try to keep them out while they appeal?

[BumRushDaShow]

6. I bet they try to get an emergency stay

so they can keep the policy until the underlying stuff works through (although that would be idiotic because we are talking "First Amendment"! LITERAL when it comes to the press.