CNN made their case for their precious Jim Acosta’s White House “hard pass” access in front of a judge yesterday. Fox News filed an amicus curiae, proving the massive entitlement among the journalistic social caste.

After a day’s delay, the judge ruled this morning that Jim Acosta can get off his timeout chair because the White House didn’t count to three first.

Federal judge Timothy J. Kelly sided with CNN on Friday, ordering the White House to reinstate chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta’s press pass.

The ruling was an initial victory for CNN in its lawsuit against President Trump and several top aides.

The lawsuit alleges that CNN and Acosta’s First and Fifth Amendment rights are being violated by the suspension of Acosta’s press pass.

Kelly did not rule on the underlying case on Friday. But he granted CNN’s request for a temporary restraining order.

This result means that Acosta will have his access to the White House restored for at least a short period of time. The judge said while explaining his decision that he believes that CNN and Acosta are likely to prevail in the case overall.

Kelly made his ruling on the basis of CNN and Acosta’s Fifth Amendment claims, saying the White House did not provide Acosta with the due process required to legally revoke his press pass.

He left open the possibility, however, that the White House could seek to revoke it again if it provided that due process, emphasizing the “very limited” nature of his ruling and saying he was not making a judgment on the First Amendment claims that CNN and Acosta have made.

This, of course, is not the end of the story.

CNN has also asked for “permanent relief,” meaning a declaration from the judge that Trump’s revocation of Acosta’s press pass was unconstitutional. This legal conclusion could protect other reporters from retaliation by the administration.

“The revocation of Acosta’s credentials is only the beginning,” CNN’s lawsuit alleged, pointing out that Trump has threatened to strip others’ press passes too.

That is one of the reasons why most of the country’s major news organizations have backed CNN’s lawsuit, turning this into an important test of press freedom.
But the judge will rule on all of that later. Further hearings are likely to take place in the next few weeks, according to CNN’s lawyers.

If you thought he was insufferable before… https://t.co/zS93NAItMV

— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) November 16, 2018

Count me among those who just doesn’t think that Jim Acosta is that special as a “journalist” – and given his inclination to be a grandstanding jackass, he is a supremely lousy reporter – and his ego didn’t need the massaging. However, those in the upper caste of journalism (otherwise known as the “blue-checks” on right and left) disagree.

This is exactly the right result. The viewpoint discrimination was apparent from the beginning. Trump's lawyers argued a maximalist position (that they could bar anyone for basically any reason) because the facts were so bad. Excellent news for the First Amendment. https://t.co/59znErBW50

— David French (@DavidAFrench) November 16, 2018

This should not surprise. WH legal arguments were weak, and one reason folks like me have applauded Trump judicial picks is because vast majority are principled jurists who can be relied upon to uphold the rule of law. https://t.co/mdlRZIuxeq

— Jonathan H. Adler (@jadler1969) November 16, 2018

What really needs to happen next is a proper shunning, honestly.

Sure, but given the existing regs, etc., result is unlikely to change. If WH wants greater leeway, it would need to go through administrative process to create new rules. (Alternatively, Trump could just stop calling on reporters he doesn't like.)

— Jonathan H. Adler (@jadler1969) November 16, 2018

It looks like the judge may require the WH to publish an #AcostaRule saying

Jackass behavior like hogging a mic or refusing to stop after one question and a follow up will not be tolerated

Then there is a standard
There can be judgment
& jerks can be booted

— Jim Hanson (@Uncle_Jimbo) November 16, 2018

Imagine the blow to Acosta’s ego if he just never got called on anymore. Imagine that Sarah Sanders said to herself, “Okay, I’m just going to continually call on a different CNN reporter from now on, when I decide to call on CNN.” We already know that those journalists who believe they breathe rarified air at the top of the pile get seriously annoyed when non-legacy media outlets get to ask questions. Imagine if the White House just decided that the daily press briefing would no longer be videotaped, only audiotaped. Imagine if no one saw Jim Acosta’s hair during a press conference?? The HORROR.

And if Jim Acosta did decide to start yelling out a question when not being called on, Sanders could simply smile and say, “Jim, that’s strike two.”

After all, if “due process” is the issue, simply count to three and then show him the door. It’s not like Acosta has a lot of support personally from his colleagues. If Jim Acosta continues being Jim Acosta, the White House will have more than enough documented evidence to remove him again.

Featured image: Jim Acosta on CNN (image via screenshot)