New York Times reporters are expected to return to the Pentagon on Monday, more than five months after the paper and dozens of news outlets gave up their credentials in response to a new restrictive press policy.

The Times sued the Defense Department in December, arguing that the policy violated the First and Fifth Amendments. Senior Judge Paul Friedman of the U.S. District Court ruled Friday that the policy was unconstitutional and ordered the Pentagon to restore the press credentials for Pentagon reporter Julian Barnes — a plaintiff in the case — as well as any other Times journalists.

“We’ve heard from the Pentagon and they’ve indicated our journalists will get space and credentials today at some point,” a Times spokesperson told TheWrap on Monday.

The junta is, of course, appealing the verdict.

  • stoicandanxious@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    We all knew this was illegal but they do it anyway to see what they can get away. It’s a drop in the bucket.

  • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    You mean the anti-trans, pro-Israel, ‘both sides are equally valid’ New York Times?

      • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I wasn’t meaning that to attack you or imply it shouldn’t be posted.

        I certainly will not lobby against NYT having access to freely cover the government, but I definitely will not support them in their fight, especially when their reaction to Trump’s rise was to push further rightwards. I have no confidence they are interested in using their journalistic access for holding the DoD accountable for anything, just in making money from their remaining enlightened-centrist reader-base who want to hear the administration’s pro-war stance presented as normal news.

        • Powderhorn@beehaw.orgOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 hours ago

          I took no offence, but I appreciate the clarification.

          To me, this is not about The New York Times, but rather the larger implications for the industry as a whole, rickety though it may be. At the risk of bastardizing Voltaire, I would have the same thoughts if OANN were the plaintiff.

          Who gets access is less important than that everyone gets access. We don’t have a functioning Fourth Estate without that.