A White House press access controversy emerges as journalists clash with Trump officials over geographical naming requirements.
According to The Mirror US, The Associated Press has filed a lawsuit against three Trump administration officials after its journalists were barred from Mar-a-Lago, Air Force One, and White House events for refusing to adopt Trump's "Gulf of America" designation instead of the Gulf of Mexico.
The lawsuit, filed on February 21, 2025, in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., names White House Chief of Staff Susan Wiles, Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich, and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt as defendants.
The AP argues that the administration's actions violate First Amendment protections and constitute an unconstitutional attempt to control press language.
Executive order sparks media access controversy
The conflict began when Trump issued an executive order attempting to rename both the Gulf of Mexico and Mount Denali. The AP maintained its editorial independence by continuing to use the original name "Gulf of Mexico" while acknowledging Trump's new designation in its coverage.
The White House responded by implementing a swift ban on AP journalists from crucial press areas on February 11, 2025. This action prevented AP reporters from accessing events open to other members of the White House press pool.
Trump directly addressed the situation, stating that the ban would remain in effect until the AP agreed to use his preferred terminology. The administration's stance has drawn criticism from media organizations across the country.
Press freedom organizations rally behind AP lawsuit
Approximately 40 news organizations have signed a letter organized by the White House Correspondents Association demanding the administration reverse its policy against the AP. The widespread support highlights growing concerns about press freedom and government overreach.
The AP's legal team emphasizes that the organization has been part of the White House press pool for over a century, providing crucial coverage of presidential activities to billions of readers worldwide.
According to the lawsuit, The Associated Press stated:
The Constitution does not allow the government to control speech. Allowing such government control and retaliation to stand is a threat to every American's freedom. The AP therefore brings this action to vindicate its rights to the editorial independence guaranteed by the United States Constitution and to prevent the Executive Branch from coercing journalists to report the news using only government-approved language.
Constitutional implications and future developments
The lawsuit alleges violations of the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. The AP's legal team argues that the administration's actions represent arbitrary denial of access based solely on editorial choices.
The case has broader implications for press freedom and government authority over media language. The AP serves over 4 billion people daily, making this dispute significant for global news coverage.
The federal court's decision could set an important precedent regarding government influence over media terminology and press access to official events.
Next steps in constitutional challenge
The Associated Press lawsuit against Trump administration officials seeks immediate restoration of press access after being banned from key locations for refusing to adopt Trump's "Gulf of America" designation. The case, filed in Washington, D.C.'s U.S. District Court, challenges the constitutionality of restricting media access based on terminology choices. As the federal judge considers the arguments, the outcome could significantly impact press freedom and the relationship between government officials and media organizations.
