US judge blocks Pentagon’s restrictions on press after New York Times lawsuit

US judge blocks Pentagon’s restrictions on press after New York Times lawsuit Lawsuit alleged changes gave DoD free rein to punish reporters and outlets over coverage it did not like Sign up for the Breaking News US email to get newsletter alerts in your inbox A federal judge has blocked key portions of the Pentagon’s press access policy, siding with the New York Times and ruling that the Trump administration’s controversial policy was unconstitutional. The policy , which was introduced in October, prohibited journalists from soliciting information that the defense department didn’t directly provide, and revoked the credentials of any outlet that didn’t sign on. News outlets including the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Associated Press, Reuters, Bloomberg News and the Atlantic joined TV networks in refusing to sign. Of 56 news outlets in the Pentagon Press Association, only one agreed to sign onto the new policy. “Those who drafted the first amendment believed that the nation’s security requires a free press and an informed people and that such security is endangered by governmental suppression of political speech,” US district court judge Paul Friedman wrote in his opinion. “That principle has preserved the nation’s security for almost 250 years. It must not be abandoned now.” A lawsuit by the New York Times in the Washington DC federal court alleged that policy allowed the administration leeway to cut off access to any outlets or reporters whose coverage it didn’t like, violating constitutional free speech protections as outlined in the first amendment. Donald Trump’s administration argued said the policy is reasonable and necessary to protect the military. Friedman, in ruling against the Pentagon policy, said while national security “must be protected”, it is also imperative that the public stay informed. “Especially in light of the country’s recent incursion into Venezuela and its ongoing war with Iran, it is more important than ev...