Judge orders Trump administration to restore Acosta's press pass

A distinction without a difference but yeah I'll go with that.

 

Big difference in pushing for an answer and trying to initiate a debate which is what Acosta did.

 

LOL! Yeah, if defending the rights of a free press is cause for a civil war, then how do you feel about our free elctions??? Y'know, where Trumpians just lost half the legislative suppor???? LOL!!!! Go ahead, take your first shot!

 

Sure, but apparently "at will" laws trump EEOC

 

When information is announced by the government, and you may not be there to report it because of the government, than the government is interfering with the distribution of information that is being announced. It's a violation of the 1st amendment. But I guess you lot right wingers don't care about the constitution.

 

This might be your wisest post ever. Except for the part where you don't recognize the distinction between "based on" and "not in violation of".

As to the entire thread, the President can't just revoke a press pass of someone who's a member of the WH press corps; the WH is required to follow a process in revoking a press pass, and cite actual reasons for doing so. The Constitution was not implicated, my goofy RW red-herring chums.

 

It was a decision based on due process which is based on the Constitution. It was not a decision based on freedom of the press as the left would like you to believe. Rules are now in place and Trump holds the keys to the white House briefing room

 

Judge did say exactly that. There was no process to revoke his pass. He still hasn't made one. So that means Trump got nothing on Acosta. All you got is a special snowflake president getting his panties in a twist for hearing a question that he doesn't like. He interrupted Acosta during his question all the time. Exceptionally rude.

 

Not the first amendment, though, which is what some folks seem to be focused on.

Trump is still a big whiny baby, though.

 

Correct me if I'm mistaken but I believe it is based on the "due process" language in the first amendment. As far as Trump goes he deserves to be able to hold a press conference where the press behaves like ladies and gentlemen instead of an angry mob.

 

It was not a legal or governmental process it was a news conference. What due process do I have to walk into the White House whenever I want?

 

You don't have a press pass, my friend. Apparently, that carries with it some due process rights--kind of like a license, so you're wrong. Moreover, nobody is saying that means you get to "walk into the WH whenever you want" if you have a press pass. Quit making **** up.

 

That was an angry mob? Nope--it was a guy pressing for answers to questions. That's what the press does. Was he being a bit of a prick? Yes, buthe was still doing his job.

 

The judges argument was due process was not part of revoking the press pass. This is an extremely strong interpretation of due process but this judge is a very strict constitutionalist so I can understand what he did.

 

It was a guy badgering the president in an attempt to debate not question well after the president had asked him to sit down and let another reporter get their question in.

 

I agree, for the most part. I would construe it like revoking a license without the process which is due.

BTW, you should start a thread about the man your moniker represents.

 

​

The US government is bound that they can not interfering with the distribution of information.
That means ones they have a press conference,... they can not regulate the information.
And kicking out reporters for asking "the wrong" questions is regulating.​

 

They do that all the damned time! Acosta pushed the envelope, but those WH reporters historically try to keep the floor.

 

So removing all the media you do not like to be present, because of the way they report, so only the type of reporting remains, is in now way tempering how the government distributes it's information? Dude... you're saying North Korea got a 1st amendment just like the US. lol

And you call your self a US nationalists? What a JOKE!

 

You are mistaken, there's no "due process language in the First Amendment, that language is in the Fifth Amendment:

I've highlighted the relevant parts, one can read the (presumably applicable) First Amendment to read; "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedon… of the press" and the Fifth Amendment as; "No person... shall be... deprived of... property, without due process of law."

The judge implicated both Amendments in his ruling, but only specified the Fifth in temporarily restoring Acosta's press pass, as he found Acosta had a "property right" in the pass and it was taken from him without a notice and hearing (i.e. due process).

I still don't see a breach of the freedom of the press by denying Acosta a press pass, await with interest to see how the judge applies the First Amendment.

I think Acosta's "property right" in the pass may depend on the conditions with which it was issued as I'm sure there are some (for example, these are probably "non-transferable" and probably limited to specific times and places). If the pass says "must be surrendered on demand", Acosta may not even have a "property right" in it.

The due process issue is easily resolved; issue a notice of intent to confiscate the pass, provide a hearing that allows Acosta to challenge the decision and consider the merits of his challenge before confiscating the pass.

 

You can't turn our complaints about the Democrats back against us. We have long complained it is Democrats that do not care about the constitution. When Obama kicked reporters out of his presence, your side defended him and we defended freedom of the press.

We defend all of the press, not merely a man who swore he will take his vendetta against Trump to the public by being openly hostile to the people's president.

 

He only spoke to one person, Acosta. He never said he wants the entire press kicked out. Acosta can't bring civility to his job so perhaps he needs to be removed by CNN and insert a reporter able to be civil and get accurate data that Acosta does not try to get. Acosta should do more than act like a civil reporter, he needed to get back to basics of good reporting and then Trump can work with him. Trump works well with civil reporters.

 

How much of that loss only in the House do you blame the media for? And why did the Democrats fail to attract men to their house advantage but got almost all women? Democrat men seem less attractive to women for some reason. What do you suppose the reason is? All i heard on the Sunday news talk shows by the major media is that women stormed the democrat party to replace their own men.

 

The white house is constructing fair rules that apply to all reporters. Acosta is the only reporter banned and those watching him operate realize why he got banned. And yet his other democrat reporters are still on the job. When will Democrats blame Acosta and him alone for his terrible behavior? Do they want the rest of the Democrats press to act like Acosta or remain good decent reporters?

 

If they do they will assign him a new seat.