by Stephen Kaus on March 3, 2025 (BeyondChron.org)
AP Case Draws Trump-Appointed Judge
By seizing control of the White House press pool from the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA), President Donald Trump gained control of which reporters can ask him questions. Less reported is that his move may help him defeat the Associated Press lawsuit to regain its access to the White House.
Because the Associated Press continues to use Gulf of Mexico and not Trump’s Gulf of America, the president cut off AP’s access to the White House Press Office, the Oval Office and Air Force One. Associated Press sued, claiming free speech and due process violations. The case drew Trump-appointed Judge Trevor McFadden.
Although Judge McFadden did not issue a temporary restraining order at the initial hearing on February 24, 2025, he felt it would be “viewpoint discrimination” to use AP’s choice of words to exclude it from the press pool. “The White House has accepted the correspondents’ association to be the referee here, and has just discriminated against one organization. That does seem problematic,” he said from the bench.
The judge noted that the correspondents’ group had been tasked by the White House to choose the members of its pool. He suggested that under those circumstances it was questionable if AP could be excluded for its manner of expression.
McFadden also said that he found it strange that an outside organization and not the White House chooses the press pool, even though that has long been the case. He asked whether Trump is bound “by what happened with President McKinley?”
“It feels a little odd, he continued, “that the White House is somehow bound by the decisions organizations make as to who can and cannot come into the Oval Office,” and he suggested that “the White House could decide to throw out the White House Correspondents Association altogether.”
Finally, McFadden warned the White House that previous cases on excluding reporters was “uniformly unhelpful to the White House.” The administration might “think about whether what they’re doing is really appropriate given the case law.”
They did not think long. The next day, the Trump administration took over the task of picking the press pool from the WHCA. This allowed the White House to select, authoritarian style, which news organizations would participate in close coverage and distribute the news to others. It is no surprise that AP is not included.
The move also may have strengthened the defense to the AP suit. The administration would not be rejecting a choice by another organization, but rather selecting a new pool, which they would claim was discretionary and not selected due to AP’s choice of words.
Before a more sympathetic judge or, ultimately, Supreme Court, AP’s argument would still stand. AP’s displacement is obviously because of its continued use of “Gulf of Mexico,” a choice it explains in its Complaint is because the global dissemination of its news accounts requires that it “ensure that place names and geography are easily recognizable to all audiences.”
Judge McFadden should see through this White House charade. After all, on February 14th the White House tweeted that because the AP had not complied with its demand to use “Gulf of America,” it was banned from “access to limited spaces, like the Oval Office and Air Force One.” On February 18th, Trump Chief of Staff Susan Wiles wrote that the ban was because AP’s Stylebook, which contains the “Gulf of Mexico’ verbiage, “is used by many as a standard for writing and editing,” and that it “advises journalists, scholars and classrooms around our country.”
Donald Trump’s agenda is clear: “[w]e’re going to keep them out until such time that they agree that it’s the Gulf of America” and that the AP “has been very, very wrong on the election, on Trump and the treatment of Trump.”
No other explanation is tenable.
Now the government will reverse course and tell the judge that speech did not motivate AP’s removal. That it’s simply to give others a chance. Will Judge McFadden, a former police officer and Department of Justice lawyer, buy it? He has ruled for Trump in several cases and has a mixed record on January 6 prosecutions. He should not let Trump deny the obvious, but the smart bet would be that he will rule for Trump and against AP.
As of last Tuesday, the pool consisted of three wire service reporters (AP, Reuters and Bloomberg), two print or online reporters, a radio reporter; four photographers; and a television crew. On Wednesday, the administration added Newsmax and the Blaze, both strongly pro-Trump sites, to the pool as well as Axios, a legitimate news organization. Reuters was removed along with AP.
Trump Litigation Update: San Francisco Federal Judge Orders Halt to Firing of Probationary Employees.
San Francisco Federal Judge William Alsup is a man who is sure of his beliefs and who does not suffer fools. Late last Thursday afternoon, Judge Alsup, a Clinton appointee, held that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), “does not have any authority whatsoever, under any statute in the history of the universe,” to hire or fire any employees from other departments.
Judge Alsup issued an order that the OPM should inform the departments of the workers represented by the non-profits and unions who are plaintiffs in the case, including the Pentagon, that terminations scheduled for last Friday should not proceed. He added, “I am going to count on the government to do the right thing, and to go a little bit further than I have ordered, and to let some of these agencies know what I have ruled.”
Judge Alsup’s take on the issue contradicted at least two other cases out of the 93 that have been filed to try and prevent Trump’s actions. Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointed judge in Washington D.C. ruled that he had no jurisdiction over an employment dispute and that terminated employees had to seek relief from the Federal Labor Relations Authority (“FLRA”) under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute. Judge Cooper acknowledged that “[t]he first month of President Trump’s second administration has been defined by an onslaught of executive actions that have caused, some say by design, disruption and even chaos in widespread quarters of American society.
Also, Massachusetts U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr., a Clinton appointee, ruled that unions did not have standing to contest their members’ termination.
Stephen Kaus is a retired Alameda County Superior Court Judge. @stephenkaus on X. @stephenkaus.bsky.social on Bluesky.
