AP and Trump administration clash in appeals court over who gets access to the Oval Office

The Associated Press and the Trump administration are once again facing off in a US federal appeals court, this time over a basic but volatile question: who gets to question the president?

At the centre of the dispute is the White House’s decision to restrict AP journalists from the small “pool” of reporters allowed close access to President Donald Trump. The move followed AP’s refusal to adopt Trump’s preferred term “Gulf of America” instead of its long-standing style “Gulf of Mexico”.

AP’s argument is simple: the government cannot punish a news organisation for its editorial choices. The White House’s position is just as blunt: the president decides who gets in the room.

“The First Amendment does not stop at the Oval Office door,” said Charles Tobin, the lawyer representing AP, arguing that limiting access based on viewpoint crosses a clear constitutional line.

The administration insists it has full discretion over limited-space events, comparing media access to how a president chooses who to give interviews to. In its court brief, it even suggested that if AP built its business model around guaranteed access, that was its own mistake, not the government’s problem.

The three-judge panel appeared divided but sceptical. Two judges, both appointed by Trump, questioned how any workable rule could exist without directly limiting the president’s personal discretion. Judge Neomi Rao underlined the difficulty: how does a court even define what counts as a “pool” event?

Since the case began, AP reporters have been allowed into some events but inconsistently. Photographers have fared better. AP argues this selective access damages both its work and the public’s right to be informed.

Julie Pace, AP’s executive editor, framed it even more broadly in a published op-ed: this isn’t just about one newsroom. It’s about whether the public can see power being questioned.

“When we talk about press freedom, we are really talking about your freedom,” she wrote.