President Donald Trump’s appointed Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt held a press briefing at The White House on Feb. 25 covering Department of Government Efficiency discipline, Elon Musk, immigration reports, and press briefing privileges.

One aspect from the briefing that has stuck with the American people is Leavitt’s comments about press briefing and who is allowed to speak and question the president and press secretary. Due to recent actions from the president banning the Associated Press from his briefings, citizens have questioned whether the president has authority to do so.

Leavitt addressed the legal dispute regarding a restraining order filed by the Associated Press (AP) against herself, Taylor Budowich and Susie Wiles. The Supreme Court denied the Associated Press’ request for a restraining order, and denied its request to immediately lift the ban.

As of Feb. 14, the Associated Press has been barred from attending any briefings in the Oval Office and on Air Force One following an order from the president after the Associated Press reportedly refused to call the former “Gulf of Mexico” by the new name administered by the Trump administration the “Gulf of America”.

“We’re going to keep them out until such time as they agree that it’s the Gulf of America,” Trump said.

Earlier this week, Supreme Court Judge Trevor N. McFadden denied AP’s request for an injunction to lift the ban on its reporters and photographers. 

Reports indicate that the ban could remain in effect until March 20, when another hearing will take place. In its lawsuit against the White House, AP described the decision as a “targeted attack.” The White House responded, stating that because the administration has not prohibited any media output from AP, the decision does not constitute as censorship. AP further claimed that, as of recently, the White House has expanded its press pool to include “some that are clearly sympathetic to Trump’s views.”

But, what legal basis does the Trump Administration have for banning legacy media outlets from press briefings?

According to the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and consult for their common good.”

The problem with President Trump’s decision to ban the Associated Press and restrict certain news outlets is that it does not directly violate the Constitution. The Associated Press is set to have a hearing in late March, meaning they have a legal avenue to challenge the restriction. However, some citizens question whether the hearing will be fair, as the Supreme Court has been perceived as siding with the president’s administration since his second term began. 

“The problem with that argument though is the Press, they can still write whatever they want, but they don’t have a seat at the table. So is that a crime necessarily?” West Chicago Community High School AP US history teacher John Chisholm said. 

Legal and ethical obligations in a position as powerful as the presidency tend to differ though. For years, there has been ongoing debate about the role of morality and ethics in presidential leadership.

As of Jan. 20, President Trump revoked several orders by the previous Biden administration, including “Executive Order 13989 of Jan. 20, 2021, which outlines ethics commitments for executive branch personnel. 

On a moral and ethical level, the president has a responsibility to the American people, as stated in the oath of office: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” 

The Constitution has long been said to be the foundation by which the country’s governance stands, the United States identifies as a democracy, upholding those values. 

The word democracy means “rule of the people” according to Britannica. Rule of the people means that the people of that province or country are allowed to elect representatives to speak  on behalf of its citizens.

The values and principles of a democracy concerning the people, according to “The Concepts and Fundamental Principles of Democracy” include: the just powers of government based upon the consent of the governed, elections in themselves do not fulfill the requirement of modern democracies; they must be free, fair, and sufficiently frequent if the People’s will is to have effect, as overseers of government, the people must have alternative sources of information. 

“I would say having their best interests [in mind], crossing the aisle to work with the other side,” Joe Zeman, WEGO’s criminal justice teacher, said regarding a president’s ethical obligations to citizens. 

A president has duties and responsibilities, both ethical and legal. Leadership should be demonstrated through behaviors that align people toward a collective direction, enabling them to work together and accomplish shared goals, and help them adjust to changing environments, according to McKinsey and Company, a global management consulting firm known for providing strategic advice to governments, businesses, and non-profit organizations. 

This balance between leadership and ethical responsibility is particularly important in a polarized political climate, where constructive dialogue can be difficult to achieve. Some experts emphasize the need for more productive discussions in navigating political disagreements.

“I would just like to re-emphasize the idea that if you disagree with somebody, that’s okay. But let’s try to have the conversations more productive because what we have been doing the past 10-15 years has not worked,” Zeman said. 

Maybe: In election cycles, American politics has historically been divided between Republicans and Democrats. Given this history, the current political division is not surprising. However, for President Trump, this raises the question of whether his leadership will serve all Americans.

“I think the loser in all this, it’s not AP, it’s not reporters, it’s the American public,” Chisholm said. 

Since Trump has a strong political following, many of his supporters are expected  to agree with his actions regarding AP. 

“I think this because the president has done a remarkable job convincing people that the more entrenched a news outlet is, the greater the likelihood of it being a ‘fake news’ arm of the liberal political establishment,” David Jennings, media literacy teacher, said.

Previous US presidents have certainly shown biases towards different news sources: Woodrow Wilson is a prime example. During World War I, Wilson stated about media censorship, “I want to say again that it seems to me imperative that powers of this sort should be granted.”

President Richard Nixon openly targeted journalists he saw as adversaries and created an informal “enemies list” of individuals who had allegedly smeared his image, using federal agencies against them. This raises the question of how leadership should be exercised in a democracy – should it seek unity or deepen divisions?

Although President Trump is not the first person to express hostility  towards certain media outlets, he is the first in modern history to ban a major media outlet from White House briefings. This unprecedented decision leaves legal scholars uncertain about broader implications.

“There’s a lot of uncertainty. I think we’re going to slowly figure that out over the next few months and maybe years, to see how this plays out,” Zeman said. 

While legal experts argue that the administration has not violated constitutional protections, the debate over press access continues, raising questions about the role of the American people in holding public officials accountable.