'Way worse': Judge rips Pentagon's revised press policy

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Courthouse News Service

March 30, 2026


WASHINGTON (CN) — The New York Times urged a federal judge Monday to rebuke the Pentagon for quickly drafting a new press access policy that the newspaper argues revives a version he determined was clearly unconstitutional. On March 20, U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman reinstated press credentials for reporters who walked out en masse last fall in protest of a Defense Department policy barring journalists from obtaining any information without official approval.

According to the Times, the Pentagon instituted an interim policy on March 23, which effectively maintained a wide bar on journalists reporting freely within the Pentagon, requiring escorts through the majority of the building. Journalists’ credentials can still be revoked if they publish unauthorized nonpublic information by granting officials anonymity — albeit with knowledge and intent requirements — that would be reviewed by an “inquisition board,” which the Times argued could not be trusted to act objectively.

Theodore Boutrous, of Gibson Dunn and representing the Times, urged the Bill Clinton appointee to order the government’s compliance with his initial injunction and restore the level of press access that existed before the Pentagon implemented its new policy in October 2025. “Time is of the essence, there’s a war going on and the American people are being shut out from information,” Boutrous said. Boutrous said the government’s effort to simply restore its previous restrictions with new, shuffled around wording was akin to a court order returning a seized car, but the offending party had stolen its engine and bashed it with a sledgehammer while claiming it complied with the order.

Friedman highlighted a specific restriction barring the “intentional inducement of unauthorized disclosure” — the prior version used the term “solicitation” — as particularly onerous, calling it “way worse.”He pressed Justice Department attorney Sarah Welch to explain the distinction and how the Pentagon justified punishing journalists for asking any employee to disclose unauthorized information when the employee could easily decline to comment.

Read more: https://courthousenews.com/way-worse-judge-rips-pentagons-revised-press-policy/

---

link to FILING (PDF) - https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/julian-barnes-nyt-pentagon-motion-to-compel-declaration.pdf

REFERENCES

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143533219
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143533949
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143544059
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143546795
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143547375
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143548086
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143550262
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143551741
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143557191
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143574477
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143576738
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143576752
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143628159
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143630587
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143635955
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143637463
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143637670
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143637842

[FakeNoose]

1. Thank you Judge Paul Friedman!

Wikipedia link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_L._Friedman

If it weren't for our hero-federal judges, we'd probably be wearing swastikas now, or locked up in detention.

[yonder]

2. An "inquisition board"? That sure fits.

Some sycophant somewhere thunk overtime trying to gain favor with the TorqueMaga-in-chief.

[snot]

3. Good for them, but

where the h*ll were they when Assange was debanked, persecuted, and finally confined for 14 years until he finally "pled" to the following plea (in its totality):

"conspiracy to obtain documents, writings, and notes connected with the national defense, and willfully communicate documents relating to the national defense, from a person having both lawful and unauthorized possession of same".

i.e., as he put it, he pled guilty to journalism. That conduct is all it takes to violate the Espionage Act.

By failing to stand up for Assange and too often even printing blatant, easily disproved lies about him and his work, these other journalists made their own bed (meanwhile helping to drive readers/viewers toward alternative new sources).

Here's hoping they grow spines.

[J_William_Ryan]

4. 'Way worse'

Yet another example of the Trump regime's contempt for the rule of law.