纽约时报第二次起诉五角大楼,称媒体准入政策“明显违宪”


2026年5月18日 美国东部时间晚上7:39 / 哥伦比亚广播公司/美联社

纽约时报周一五个月内第二次起诉美国国防部,指控要求记者在五角大楼园区内必须有陪同人员的规定违反第一修正案。

这起诉讼将陪同政策描述为“一系列旨在阻止负面报道的升级举措”,并“大幅限制了长期以来媒体对五角大楼的准入权限”,违反了第一和第五修正案。

《纽约时报》发言人查理·施塔特兰泽在发给美联社的电子邮件中表示,这项政策是“五角大楼为阻止对军事事务进行独立报道而采取的违宪尝试”。“正如我们此前所言:美国民众有权了解本国政府的运作方式,以及军方以他们的名义、用他们的税款采取的行动。”

在X平台上,国防部发言人肖恩·帕内尔称《纽约时报》的最新诉讼“不过是企图扫清障碍,以便他们获取机密信息”。

此次诉讼是美国媒体与特朗普第二届政府之间日益紧张的又一攻击,这种紧张局势不仅在公开场合上演,有时也诉诸法庭。

《纽约时报》周一提起的诉讼,源于去年12月首次起诉五角大楼的一起案件,当时针对的是国防部长皮特·赫格斯泰特去年秋季实施的另一套规定。

此前的政策要求记者签署一系列限制条款才能维持每日进入五角大楼的权限,其中一条条款暗示,从军方人员那里“索取”敏感信息的记者可能被认定为安全风险并被驱逐出大楼。包括哥伦比亚广播公司新闻、美国广播公司新闻、全国广播公司新闻、有线电视新闻网和福克斯新闻在内的多家新闻机构拒绝签署该政策,被迫离开五角大楼。

blob:https://www.cbsnews.com/021c4b42-ecf0-46ae-8a55-3e88ff2776f0

美国地区法官保罗·L·弗里德曼在3月裁定该政策的部分内容违宪,认定其侵犯了该报纸及其记者朱利安·巴恩斯的权利。

五角大楼随后出台了一项新政策,规定记者若无政府人员陪同,一律不得进入大楼。法官裁定这项临时政策违反了弗里德曼3月的命令。但在政府提起上诉期间,上诉法院暂停了弗里德曼裁决的部分内容,陪同政策仍继续实施。上诉程序仍在进行中。

此次由《纽约时报》和记者巴恩斯在哥伦比亚特区地区法院提起的新诉讼,旨在推动法院直接从宪法层面审理陪同规定。

在诉状中,该报辩称,这项规定与五角大楼的其他媒体限制措施一样,有着明确的目的——“将任何不愿只报道国防部官员认可内容的记者或新闻机构拒之门外”。

它辩称,这一做法“明显违宪”。

五角大楼否认其试图强迫记者在报道前获得批准,并表示其目的是防止高度敏感信息泄露。

帕内尔周一在X平台的帖子中声称,《纽约时报》及其记者“想要不受陪同地自由穿梭于五角大楼大厅——这是其他任何联邦建筑都不赋予他们的特权”。

他补充道:“国防部的政策完全合法,其制定范围狭窄,旨在保护国家安全信息免遭非法刑事泄露。”

New York Times sues Pentagon a second time, calling press access policy “patently unconstitutional”

May 18, 2026 7:39 PM EDT / CBS/AP

The New York Times sued the Defense Department on Monday for the second time in five months, arguing a requirement that journalists be escorted while on Pentagon grounds violates the First Amendment.

The lawsuit casts the escort policy as part of “a series of escalating steps designed to stop unfavorable coverage” and “dramatically curtails longstanding press access to the Pentagon,” in violation of the First and Fifth amendments.

The policy is “an unconstitutional attempt by the Pentagon to prevent independent reporting on military affairs,” a Times spokesman, Charlie Stadtlander, said in an email to The Associated Press. “As we have said before: Americans deserve visibility into how their government is being run, and the actions the military is taking in their name and with their tax dollars.”

On X, Defense Department spokesperson Sean Parnell called the Times’ latest lawsuit “nothing more than an attempt to remove the barriers to them getting their hands on classified information.”

The Times lawsuit is another salvo in the escalating tensions between the U.S. media and the second Trump administration, which has played out both in the public arena and at times in the courts.

The paper filed Monday’s lawsuit after first suing the Pentagon in December over a separate set of rules imposed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last fall.

The older policy required reporters to sign onto a host of restrictions in order to maintain daily access to the Pentagon, including one that suggested reporters who “solicit” sensitive information from military personnel could be deemed a security risk and expelled from the building. Many news outlets — including CBS News, ABC News, NBC News, CNN and Fox News — declined to sign the policy and were forced to vacate the Pentagon.

blob:https://www.cbsnews.com/021c4b42-ecf0-46ae-8a55-3e88ff2776f0

U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman struck down parts of that policy in March, finding they violated the rights of the newspaper and one of its reporters, Julian Barnes.

The Pentagon responded by imposing a new policy that barred reporters from accessing the building altogether unless they are accompanied by a government escort. The judge ruled that the interim policy violated his March order. But the escort policy remained in place when an appeals court stayed part of Friedman’s ruling while the government appeals. The appeals process is ongoing.

The new lawsuit, filed by the paper and reporter Barnes in District of Columbia district court, aims to get the courts to directly address the escort rule on constitutional grounds.

In the filing, the paper contends the rule, like other Pentagon media restrictions, has a clear aim — “closing the Pentagon to any journalist or news organization unwilling to report only what Department officials approve.”

This, it contends, is “patently unconstitutional.”

The Pentagon has denied that it is trying to force journalists to get approval for their stories, and is instead trying to prevent leaks of highly sensitive information.

Parnell, in his X post Monday, asserted that The Times and its journalists “want to roam the halls of the Pentagon freely and without an escort — a privilege that they do not have in any other federal building.”

He added: “The Department’s policy is completely lawful and narrowly designed to protect national security information from unlawful criminal disclosure.”

评论

发表回复

您的邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用 * 标注