This story appeared in Today, Explained, a daily newsletter that helps you understand the most compelling news and stories of the day. Subscribe here.
A hearing on President Donald Trump’s White House press ban ended without a ruling this afternoon — an admittedly anticlimactic outcome, but one that will likely change very soon.
The Trump-appointed judge in the case, Timothy Kelly, appeared skeptical of the administration’s arguments for banning CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House grounds last week. Kelly said he would rule “as soon as possible.” Until then, the ban remains in place.
By all accounts, Trump’s case is a feeble one. While the Justice Department attempted to argue on Wednesday that the three outlets’ reporting jeopardized national security, Trump himself kind of gave the game away last week when he said he had singled these organizations out over what he characterized as negative and inaccurate stories.
The move sat poorly even with people and institutions you’d expect to be sympathetic to Trump: Fox News was one of several outlets that boycotted White House events this week to protest the ban, for instance.
And ahead of today’s hearing, Trump himself seemed primed to lose. In a Truth Social post on Monday, he promised he would “almost without question” appeal any decision against him.
This is all emblematic of how Trump has escalated his attacks on the news media in his second term: not just by insulting and demeaning the press, but also by weaponizing otherwise neutral-seeming rules.
Every administration has policies that regulate who can access the White House grounds and under what conditions, for instance. But in early 2025, the White House took control of the press pool — the rotating group of reporters that frequently travels with the president — and soon sought to exclude disfavored organizations.
More insidiously, Trump has mobilized regulatory agencies like the Federal Communications Commission against his perceived critics, in some cases even threatening to revoke the licenses of local TV stations that air coverage and commentary he disagrees with.
While no licenses have actually been suspended, the FCC has mysteriously pulled some up for unscheduled review. And just the prospect of government retaliation has been enough to force some content off the air: Just two weeks ago, the late-night comedy host Jimmy Kimmel said his show wouldn’t air a scheduled interview with Texas Senate candidate James Talarico because of the FCC’s new scrutiny of political content.
This playbook isn’t a Trump original, as my colleague Zack Beauchamp has explained. In fact, weaponizing broadcast regulations was also a favored technique of former Hungarian Prime Minister (and infamous strongman) Viktor Orbán, who successfully used licensing rules and other bureaucratic technicalities to force independent media outlets into submission.
Likewise, revoking the press credentials of critical reporters has long been a favorite tactic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Nico Perrino, the executive vice president of the nonprofit civil liberties group Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said in a briefing on Wednesday: “These are things that are done by regimes that we do not want to emulate.”
Lest these comparisons get you down, however, recall that neither Hungary nor Russia has all the defenses that the US does. Defenses like, for example, an independent court system.
➨ Date a little differently. It’s not just your imagination: The search for love has become weirdly intolerant and antagonistic. One new survey finds that the percentage of singles with a must-have trait list they’re checking off has risen to a whopping 34 percent. Experts blame larger cultural changes, the rise of dating apps, and negative social media narratives. But you can fight back in your own dating life by letting your guard (and maybe your standards!) down a little bit.
