Two Utah Republican lawmakers are pushing back against President Donald Trump’s decision to ban CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House, while state delegates and the governor’s office largely declined or did not immediately respond to inquiries about the administration’s restrictions.
SALT LAKE CITY — The decision by President Donald Trump to bar three prominent news organizations from the White House over the weekend has drawn swift pushback from a pair of Utah Republicans in Washington, KSL reported.
The White House defended the restrictions by pointing to years of false reporting from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico. Trump reinforced the decision in a social media post on Monday, describing the move as instituting an assault on the FAKE NEWS, something that has grown like Cancer in our beloved United States of America and adding that it was a threat to our National Security, and must be stopped, NOW! according to KSL.
Utah Delegation Split Over White House Media Ban
Following inquiries by KSL to all six members of Utah’s congressional delegation and the governor, responses were sharply divided. Spokespersons for Gov. Spencer Cox, Sen. Mike Lee, and Reps. Burgess Owens and Mike Kennedy did not immediately respond, while Rep. Celeste Maloy’s office declined to comment.
However, Sen. John Curtis and Rep. Blake Moore voiced direct opposition to the ban. Moore holds a high position in GOP House leadership.
I don't think you'd see restricting the press in any handbooks on leading the free world,
Sen. John Curtis said, as reported by KSL.
Congressman Moore does not agree with this recent decision and believes that, unless they are committing slander or libel, all media should have access to the White House. A spokesperson
Lawsuits and Broadcast Blackouts Follow Press Restrictions
The fallout extended rapidly beyond political commentary. CNN was stripped of its pool duties, which involve major news networks taking turns covering the president’s day-to-day appearances and sharing their footage with other outlets. In solidarity, four other major TV networks—ABC, CBS, Fox News, and NBC—announced they will not cover presidential events as a pool.
When the president does anything today, there will be no TV camera with the president that is broadcasting and sharing this footage,
CNN chief White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins said, as noted by KSL. Additional outlets, including the New York Times and Washington Post, also announced they would temporarily not print or share photographs taken by pool journalists.
In response to the restrictions, CNN, MS NOW, and Politico filed a lawsuit on Monday. The legal filing argues that the ban violates the First Amendment, asserting it represents a blatant violation of our most fundamental constitutional principles and was enacted as retaliation for past news coverage because he deemed it ‘negative’ and chilling future reporting about him and his administration’s policies and actions according to KSL.
Academic Analysis and Broader Political Friction
Legal and communications experts pointed to the long-standing tension between the executive branch and the press. Ed Carter, a communications professor and attorney at Brigham Young University who is also an attorney, noted that Trump has maintained a longstanding relationship with the news media, both acrimonious and collaborative.
It could be to distract from political problems or unpopular policies and events,
Carter said, describing the action as one in a long line of attacks on journalists that seem to be motivated by President Trump’s ulterior motives.
Carter added that Trump depends on news coverage
and that his fame, his notoriety and celebrity is largely due to news coverage.
Joel Campbell, a former journalist and retired journalism professor at BYU, called the ban “rash” and “knee-jerk,” telling KSL that content discrimination is really offensive to the First Amendment and seems unconstitutional, for sure.
Campbell also praised the solidarity of the other networks which decided not to cover presidential events, adding that the biggest loser in this entire debate is the public that needs independent information about the activities of the White House.
The controversy unfolds against a backdrop of separate, intensifying geopolitical friction. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remarked during an event in New York on Monday that Republicans may be probably secretly cheering Mark Carney for standing up to him
amid an escalating trade dispute involving tariffs and retaliatory measures between the United States and Canada, Yahoo reported.
Clinton cited Ohio and Michigan’s dependence on Canada, claiming 40% of Ohio exports and 60% of Michigan exports go north, while USTR data show Canada accounted for about 32% and 39%, respectively, of the states’ goods exports in 2025.
The comments came as Washington and Ottawa moved deeper into confrontation after U.S.-Canada trade talks collapsed just before the deadline. Trump’s 50% tariffs on roughly $20 billion of Canadian goods took effect Aug. 22 after a three-day reprieve, prompting Canada to announce Tuesday it would answer dollar for dollar
by imposing tariffs of 15%, 25%, and 50% on C$27.6 billion of U.S. imports starting Sept. 8.
White House spokesperson Kush Desai dismissed Clinton’s criticism in a statement shared with The Hill, stating that if Hillary Clinton knew anything about Ohio or Michigan – or Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, for that matter – she wouldn't have so humiliatingly lost to President Trump in 2016.
Worth a look