(The Center Square) – A federal judge in Tacoma on Tuesday ruled that Washington state lawmakers were within their rights to decline press passes to media figures Brandi Kruse, Jonathan Choe and Ari Hoffman.
Earlier this year, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives declined to issue press credentials to the three that would have allowed them on the floor during the current 60-day legislative session that is set to adjourn on Thursday. House officials contend that the three conservative media figures are political participants rather than neutral observers and therefore do not meet the “bona fide” journalist criteria required for floor access.
The three sued the Legislature and the Capitol Correspondents Association – the organization that handles media credential requests – claiming the association arbitrarily applied guidelines to deny them access. The trio further claimed the defendants were evaluating and enforcing rules inconsistently.
The case was removed from Thurston County Superior Court to federal court on March 2.
The three plaintiffs were seeking an emergency temporary restraining order to gain access to floor proceedings for the remainder of the session.
Jessica Goldman, an attorney with Summit Law Group, argued for the defense in Monday’s hearing that the plaintiffs are “opinion” journalists who are not entitled to credentials.
“The plaintiffs here are not just attending an event, which journalists do all the time,” Goldman said. “These plaintiffs did way more than that. They were the leaders of these events. They were the keynote speakers … they have attached their fame and notoriety to trying to get these legislative … these laws passed by the Legislature.”
The Citizen Action Defense Fund represents the plaintiffs.
“The process used to award press passes by the defendants clearly violates the federal and state constitutional protections, freedom of the press and due process,” CADF Executive Director Jackson Maynard told the judge at Monday’s hearing. “My clients are the eyes and ears of the people in the legislative process. Their voices and opinions should not be excluded.”
U.S. District Judge David Estudillo disagreed, explaining that the plaintiffs failed to show that they were denied passes because of their political affiliations and failed to show that the process was arbitrary.
“The Court acknowledges that both parties have legitimate interests at stake here,” Estudillo said in Tuesday’s order, “but because Plaintiffs have not shown a likelihood of success on the merits on their free press or due process claims, and because the House has a substantial interest in ensuring the reporters it permits to access the House floor meet the credential standards promulgated so the House may ‘debate and pass laws without interruption or lobbying in that space."”
Jackson emailed The Center Square a statement following the decision.
“We are not done with this fight,” he said. “We strongly disagree with the Court’s decision on the injunction motion and while we are not appealing it given the short time left in session, we will continue to litigate this case until we either prevail or exercise every viable legal option. Our goal is to get our clients the access they are entitled to by the constitution as members of the press.”
