for jim acosta but for the rights of the press in general. the aclu as well. i think we can share their statement saying today s decision reaffirms no one, not even the president, is above the law. th today s court ruling will have the opposite effect. continuing, the freedom of the press is a bedrock principle in our democrat is strengthened when journalists challenge our leaders rather than defer to them. what have the past two years been about? in some ways, backsliding. people concerned about our institutions, the strength of our institutions. concerned about our democracy rotting from inside. today, the courts effectively did their job. looked at this case and supported checks and balances. and this case was not certainly just about cnn or even about the white house. this was about government officials in state houses, in city halls, whether they can throw out reporters who they view as annoyances. and this was a very clear statement that at the minimum, if you re going to do th
the sheriff defended the system this week, saying that this fire just moved so quickly, it was difficult to stay on top of it. he also said that some people may have gotten the alert and just chosen to ignore it. the president, he will be here tomorrow to survey the damage for himself and speak with a lot of people like jennifer fitzgerald. as i said earlier, it s not going to take much to find them. someone has to help those people find shelter that they can live in. yes. and survive in. it s remarkable. scott mclean, thanks very much. so we re also awaiting a decision any moment now from a federal judge in washington, d.c. expected to rule in cnn s lawsuit over press credentials. press freedom at the white house.
times to fox news itself saying this is not right, what happened to jim acosta. because they know it could be them. that s right. one way of looking at what jim acosta was accused of doing was being too aggressive with follow-up questions. another word for that is journalism. there you go. and if that results in losing your ability to do your livelihood, throwing you out of the press corps, that s a threat to everyone who covers as brian said, not just the white house, but state houses and city halls. think of the precedent. i said this on the air the other day. the only other personal experience i had was in china, where china rejected and overturned and took away press credentials because they didn t like the questions asked or the coverage of the stories. i m not saying the u.s. is china. i ll just saying there is a commonality there. you don t want to get close to that. there s a lot to protect about the american experiment. this is part of it. cnn issued a stateme
that s not accurate. yeah, the lawyer doesn t know how journalism works. look, he was given a tough case. he s having to represent the president in this case, and media lawyers knew all along this was a strong case for cnn, but the justice department lawyer s arguments were concerning. at one point he said hypothetically, the white house has a right to kick out any reporter for any reason at any time. that s a disturbing thing to hear from a government lawyer in the united states. i don t want other countries hearing that and thinking they can repress the press elsewhere as well. so this government lawyer, you know, he may have to make further arguments to that effect. but it was concerning to hear that said in court. it breaks with decades of tradition in our country. and hopefully we can break back to what s normal now. i think you said an important word there, you said tradition. a lot of what goes on between the press and the public the press and government, is based on tradi
was by tweet or by statement or by the president himself, that just did not afford jim acosta the due process rights that he needed in order to have that press pass revoked. so a very limited ruling here, but quite a victory for jim acosta, for cnn, saying that yes, in fact, jim acosta needs to get his hard pass back right away. again, this judge ruling very narrowly, very limited in his scope here, and now this can go forward as to whether or not there were first amendment rights violated here. but this judge, again, we noted. i heard you guys note. this is a trump nominated judge. this judge has only been on the federal bench for just about a year now. so toeing the line very carefully here. very narrow in his ruling, but again, a big win for jim acosta and cnn, saying that the white house must restore his hard pass immediately. jessica, i could ask as well, because it appears we have the attorneys coming out.