US President Donald Trump has said he is “immediately” banning CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, Hiru News reported, citing the BBC.

In a post on Truth Social on Friday, Trump said the outlets “constantly write or report fiction or lies” about his administration. He gave no examples, and the post did not identify any specific story or reporting that prompted the decision.

“Media outlets shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report fiction and lies when they’re covering the President of the United States, the Trump Administration or the United States of America. Other news outlets to follow,” the post said.

Trump later called it a “very simple ban” but did not explain how it would work. It is not clear whether staff of the three outlets would be physically barred from the White House grounds.

The ban was not in force hours later

The most concrete detail in the reporting is that nothing appeared to have changed on the ground.

Reporters from both Politico and CNN were still on the White House grounds shortly after the announcement, and a CNN crew was travelling with Vice-President JD Vance to and from an event in Iowa.

Asked about it later in the Oval Office, Trump said there was “no reason” for the announcement landing on a Friday afternoon. “It’s really just cumulative stories over the last few years,” he said. “You get sick of it.” He added that there “may be others to join them”, without naming any, and acknowledged legal challenges may follow: “I think it’s good to point it out, whether it survives or doesn’t.”

The outlets respond

CNN called a potential ban illegal and said it “stands fully behind our White House team and their fair and accurate reporting.”

“We have a right under the US Constitution to do that reporting without hindrance or interference from the government. Should the ban which President Trump threatened go ahead, it would be an illegal assault on that fundamental and constitutionally-protected right.”

Politico said it “will continue to fairly report on this White House and future ones” and would “vigorously defend our First Amendment rights against any attempt to restrict them.”

MS NOW, formerly MSNBC, declined to comment.

White House Correspondents Association president Jacqui Heinrich — who works for Fox News — said the association stands in defence of colleagues “being singled out for doing their jobs.”

“This is about more than the rights of journalists. It is about the right of the American people to receive a full and independent account of the activities, policies and decisions of whoever occupies the nation’s highest office.”

NewsFirst, reporting the same announcement, noted that free speech experts say the move conflicts with the First Amendment’s protections for a free press, and that legal challenges are near certain.

This follows a pattern

The announcement is the latest in a series of moves against the White House press corps since Trump returned to office in January 2025.

In February, the White House took control of the press pool with access to the president — an arrangement the White House Correspondents Association had managed for more than a century. The same month, the administration barred Associated Press reporters and photographers from limited-access spaces such as the Oval Office and Air Force One over the agency’s continued use of “Gulf of Mexico” rather than “Gulf of America.” The AP sued, and that case remains ongoing.

In his first term, Trump banned CNN correspondent Jim Acosta from the White House; his credentials were restored after CNN sued.

Over the same period the administration has brought conservative bloggers, influencers and other outlets into the press room, arguing this provides a wider range of perspectives.

A note on the sourcing

Both Sri Lankan outlets are relaying international wire and broadcast copy rather than reporting independently — Hiru’s account follows the BBC’s. Two outlets carrying the story is not two independent verifications of it.

Update — a former press secretary says he tried this before

Stephanie Grisham, White House press secretary during Trump’s first administration, said she was “not surprised” by the ban, and disclosed that Trump had once ordered her to remove the press corps entirely, Hiru News reported.

Speaking to CNN anchor Brianna Keilar, Grisham said Trump instructed her to identify alternative locations off the White House grounds because he wanted the whole press corps removed, not particular journalists. She said she stalled the directive by repeatedly citing complex legal issues, and her tenure ended before it was carried out.

That reframes Friday’s announcement. It is not a new impulse being acted on, but an old one that a staff member had previously slowed — and Grisham’s account is that the restraint was procedural, not a change of mind.

Asked whether current officials might play that role, she said she had hoped figures such as Susie Wiles or Dan Scavino might, but that Trump has surrounded himself with sycophants and now lacks the guardrails of his first term.

Update — a fourth outlet, and a contradiction about the platform

Daily Mirror’s account adds a specific financial allegation: Trump accused Politico of receiving an $8 million subscription from the US government under former President Joe Biden, calling it illegal and ridiculous and alleging it amounted to corruption, Daily Mirror reported. The figure is Trump’s own claim, is not independently verified in any account, carries no timeframe, and Politico is not quoted in response to it.

Daily Mirror also reports Trump saying MS NOW changed its name from MSNBC because it lacked viewership and credibility, and quotes the sign-off “President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

The outlets contradict each other on where the post appeared. Hiru and the BBC-sourced account place it on Truth Social; Daily Mirror says it was posted to Trump’s official X account. The quoted wording is the same in both. This is the second time this month Daily Mirror has attributed a Trump post to X where other outlets cite Truth Social — the same split arose on the Greenland security announcement. On the balance of accounts, Truth Social is the better-supported attribution.

Not reported

Neither account says when the ban is supposed to take effect, what mechanism would enforce it, or whether press credentials have actually been revoked. Neither says whether the three outlets’ hard passes remain valid, nor whether any legal action had been filed at the time of writing.

Sources