US court sides with New York Times on Pentagon press access

KABUL (Pajhwok): A federal judge in the United States has blocked the implementation of a policy introduced under Donald Trump’s administration that restricted journalists’ access to the Pentagon.

According to Al Jazeera, the ruling—issued on Friday—favored The New York Times and found key provisions of the policy to be unlawful.

U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman, based in Washington, D.C., said the Pentagon’s policy improperly restricted press credentials for journalists who refused to comply with the new rules.

The New York Times filed a lawsuit in December against the Pentagon and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, arguing that the policy violated fundamental constitutional rights, including freedom of speech and due process.

In his ruling, Friedman concluded that the policy breached the First and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, stressing that press freedom is essential to national security and public awareness.

A spokesperson for The New York Times welcomed the decision, saying it safeguards the core principles of a free press and ensures the public can remain informed about government actions and military operations.

The Pentagon had defended the policy as necessary to protect sensitive national security information and prevent access by individuals deemed security risks.

However, lawyers for The New York Times argued that the measure was intended to suppress critical reporting on the Trump administration.

The judge further noted that evidence suggested the policy aimed to exclude “undesirable” journalists and replace them with those aligned with the government—amounting to viewpoint discrimination.

He emphasized that during periods of heightened tensions involving the United States—such as recent conflicts and geopolitical strains—public access to diverse sources of information becomes even more critical.

Friedman ordered the Pentagon to reinstate the credentials of seven New York Times journalists and gave the department one week to demonstrate compliance with the ruling.

sa