New York Times sues Pentagon over press access, First Amendment rights

WASHINGTON – The New York Times accused the Pentagon in a lawsuit on Dec 4 of infringing on the constitutional rights of journalists by imposing a set of new restrictions on reporting about the military.

In the suit, filed in the US District Court in Washington, the Times argued that the Defence Department’s new policy violated the First Amendment and “seeks to restrict journalists’ ability to do what journalists have always done – ask questions of government employees and gather information to report stories that take the public beyond official pronouncements”.

The rules, which went into effect in October, are a stark departure from the previous ones, in both length and scope.

They require reporters to sign a 21-page form that sets restrictions on journalistic activities, including requests for story tips and inquiries to Pentagon sources.

Reporters who do not comply could lose their press passes, and the Pentagon has accorded itself “unbridled discretion” to enforce the policy as it sees fit, according to the lawsuit.

The suit said that “reporting any information not approved by department officials” could lead to punishment, “regardless of whether such news gathering occurs on or off Pentagon grounds, and regardless of whether the information at issue is classified or unclassified”.

The complaint sought a court order halting enforcement of the rules and a declaration that the provisions “targeting the exercise of First Amendment rights” were unlawful.

The Times has retained Mr Theodore J. Boutrous, a First Amendment lawyer who has argued major media access cases in federal court. Mr Julian E. Barnes, a Pentagon reporter for the Times, is listed as a plaintiff alongside the company.

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The new rules are the latest step in a months-long effort by Mr Pete Hegseth, the Defence Secretary, to curtail the access and privileges of the Pentagon press corps.

Mr Hegseth arrived at the Pentagon in January after a bruising confirmation process that surfaced allegations of excessive drinking and sexual assault, which he said were untrue.

Early in his tenure, Mr Hegseth proposed evicting from the Pentagon a veteran reporter at NBC News who contributed to some of the coverage.

The department later stripped several national news outlets of their workspaces in the Pentagon, offering them mostly to conservative outlets. Mr Hegseth has also added limits on where reporters can roam in the complex.

A draft of the new restrictions first emerged in September, and was revised after pushback from lawyers representing news organisations.

The final rules were released on Oct 6, and more than a week later, dozens of credentialed journalists – including six from the Times –

surrendered their badges

instead of signing the document. The departing outlets have continued reporting on the military despite the access limits.

Many major news organisations released statements in October

condemning the Pentagon policy

as an incursion on the First Amendment.

“The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections,” said a statement from ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News Media and NBC News.

In a news briefing on Dec 3, a senior Times lawyer said there had been discussions with other news organisations about joining the suit but that the newspaper decided to proceed alone.

Trump vs the press

The suit took issue with multiple provisions of the new policy, including one that empowered the Pentagon to deem a journalist “a security or safety risk”.

Such a determination could hinge on whether the journalist engaged in unauthorised disclosure of classified information or certain unclassified information, among other considerations.

The policy’s wording on “solicitation” has been a particular worry of media lawyers. It asserts that the First Amendment does not protect reporters when they “solicit government employees to violate the law by providing confidential government information” and could apply to “calls for tips” that encourage Defence Department employees to share “non-public” agency information.

Providing channels for sources to send information, the suit said, was a “routine” practice for journalists.

Legal clashes between journalists and the government over access to federal buildings have arisen repeatedly across President Donald Trump’s two terms.

During his first administration, the White House pulled the press passes of two White House correspondents. The journalists regained those passes after litigation.

In 2025, The Associated Press sued the government after being excluded from White House press pool events in cramped spaces such as the Oval Office;

litigation challenging that move is ongoing

.

In each of those cases, the government targeted one journalist or outlet for punishment.

The Pentagon restrictions, on the other hand, seek to bind an entire press corps. And those restrictions, the suit argued, would suppress the work of news organisations “with perceived viewpoints the department disfavours”.

After the departure of the legacy press corps, the Pentagon announced that a new group of outlets had agreed to the restrictions and would work from the press space in the building.

The new arrivals feature an array of pro-Trump outlets that have echoed administration talking points and show little inclination to investigate its actions. NYTIMES