← Back to context

Comment by philipallstar

2 days ago

First amendment:

> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Special access is not freedom of speech, or any media org that already wasn't allowed into the White House press briefings could be said to have had their First Amendment rights violated. But you knew that.

Yeah, no.

The why of things matters. There’s long standing precedent on this.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/569...

> We think that notice to the unsuccessful applicant of the factual bases for denial with an opportunity to rebut is a minimum prerequisite for ensuring that the denial is indeed in furtherance of Presidential protection, rather than based on arbitrary or less than compelling reasons.

Similarly, not credentialing an incidentally Jewish reporter wouldn’t be a violation. But removing their pass for being Jewish later would be.