Justice Department Probes TV Networks Over White House Pool

The US Justice Department is investigating ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and Fox News over whether their White House television pool response violated federal antitrust laws after President Donald Trump restricted access for CNN, MS NOW and Politico. The inquiry examines how the networks handled presidential coverage and shared footage with other media outlets.

According to the Justice Department, the networks were asked to provide communications about the TV pool, a rotating system that allows one crew to cover limited-access presidential events and distribute material to other organizations.

The investigation followed a temporary suspension of pool coverage after Trump blocked credentials for the three outlets. A federal judge later ordered access restored while the legal dispute continues.

A Justice Department spokesperson said the agency is reviewing whether the networks broke competition rules.

"Members of the television press pool have boycotted covering White House events. Group boycotts among commercial competitors can violate the Sherman Act," the spokesperson said.

The department also explained that the review focuses on whether the organizations' actions violated antitrust laws.

"The Antitrust Division is simply investigating to determine whether these news organizations have violated the antitrust laws," the Justice Department spokesperson said.

Bruce D. Brown, president of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, criticized the investigation and said it appeared connected to the administration's dispute with media organizations.

"The investigation appears to be a pretext for seeking records from the networks about how they are covering daily White House events during a media ban the president himself put in place," Brown said.

Brown also argued that newsroom decisions about coverage are protected under constitutional free press protections.

"The decisions news organizations make about coverage are protected by the First Amendment, and summoning antitrust authority, on top of the retaliatory actions the White House has already taken to bar certain outlets, is another and even more brazen attempt to try to intimidate journalists," Brown said.

Jonathan Kanter, a former Biden administration assistant attorney general for antitrust, said he believed antitrust law did not apply to the press pool arrangement.

"This is not even in the same zip code of an antitrust violation," Kanter said.

Kanter said the dispute involved press freedom rather than commercial competition.

"It’s literally freedom of speech," Kanter said.

The former antitrust official added that cooperation among reporters to create the pool should not be treated differently because of a disagreement with the administration.

"It’s no more an antitrust violation than the reporters coming together to form the pool in the first place," Kanter said.

The five networks issued a joint statement after the pool disruption, saying public access to government coverage was affected by the dispute.

"The public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government. No administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting," the networks said.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation also responded to the investigation, while Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression executive vice president Nico Perrino questioned the administration's actions.

"What nonsense," the Freedom of the Press Foundation said.

Perrino criticized the investigation as another pressure tactic against news organizations.

"Trump may view the presidency as a business venture, but news outlets’ standing up for the First Amendment has nothing to do with antitrust law," Perrino said.

Perrino also questioned whether the administration was willing to stop using legal measures against critics.

"Is there a lever this administration is unwilling to pull to punish its enemies?" Perrino wrote.

"So much for ‘bringing free speech back to America’ and ending the lawfare," Perrino wrote.