The New York Times has launched a federal lawsuit against the US Department of Defense and its leadership, challenging new Pentagon rules that severely restrict journalists' access and mandate they report only on pre-approved information.
Legal Challenge Against Pentagon's 'Unconstitutional' Policy
The lawsuit, set to be filed in federal court in Washington D.C., names Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell, and the entire Department of Defense as defendants. The legal action seeks to overturn requirements introduced in October that compel reporters to surrender their press passes if they refuse to agree to the new terms.
Charlie Stadtlander, a spokesperson for the New York Times Company, stated the policy represents "an attempt to exert control over reporting the government dislikes." He argued this violates the constitutional rights of a free press under the First and Fifth Amendments, preventing the Fourth Estate from holding the executive branch to account.
The Pentagon is expected to defend the restrictions on national security grounds, the same justification used when implementing them. The New York Times, however, vows to "vigorously defend against the violation of these rights," citing a history of challenging administrations opposed to scrutiny.
A New, Ideologically-Aligned Press Corps Moves In
The dispute escalated this week as the Pentagon's press briefing room saw a significant shift in its occupants. Traditional pool reporters who refused to comply with the new rules were replaced by a cohort of new faces sympathetic to the current administration's 'MAGA' movement.
This new intake included figures such as former Florida Representative Matt Gaetz, now an anchor with One America News Network, and prominent right-wing influencers Laura Loomer, Jack Posobiec, and James O'Keefe. Notably, none have prior experience covering the US military.
The changeover was marked by boasts on social media platform X, with several new entrants claiming to have taken the desk previously used by The Washington Post's military affairs reporter, Dan Lamothe. Lamothe wryly responded that he had "at least two or three desks left" at the Pentagon.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell derided the journalists who handed in their passes, claiming they "chose to self-deport" and "will not be missed."
Broader Implications for Press Freedom and Accountability
The lawsuit has garnered support from media advocacy groups. The Pentagon Press Association said it was "encouraged" by the Times's move to defend press freedom. Similarly, the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press announced its support on Thursday.
Gabe Rottman, the committee's Vice President of Policy, condemned the Pentagon's policy as unlawful. "It gives government officials unchecked power over who gets a credential and who doesn't, something the First Amendment prohibits," he said. He emphasised the public's need for independent journalism at the Pentagon, particularly during a period of heightened scrutiny of the department's actions.
While the new, ideologically-aligned press corps will now report from inside the Pentagon, more established outlets will continue to cover its activities from outside the building. The outcome of this lawsuit could set a critical precedent for the balance between national security claims and the constitutional protections afforded to the press in the United States.
