2026年3月6日 美国东部时间晚上8:15 / 路透社
作者：简·沃尔夫
五角大楼从空中俯瞰，美国华盛顿特区，2022年3月3日。路透社/约书亚·罗伯茨/档案照片 购买许可权，新标签页打开
- 摘要
- 公司
- 《纽约时报》挑战五角大楼新闻政策
- 法官质疑五角大楼政策的合宪性
- 法官未当庭宣判，但将迅速作出裁决
路透社华盛顿3月6日电 – 一名美国法官周五似乎可能阻止五角大楼实施的新限制政策，该政策威胁记者，若他们要求国防部员工披露机密或某些类型的非机密信息，可能被标记为安全风险。
美国联邦地区法官保罗·弗里德曼(Paul Friedman)在华盛顿听取了《纽约时报》提起的法律诉讼中约两小时的辩论，他向唐纳德·特朗普总统政府的律师询问，该政策是否违反了美国宪法第一修正案对新闻自由和言论自由的保护。
每日新闻摘要 – 订阅《每日简报》时事通讯，将最新法律新闻直接发送到您的收件箱。立即注册。
广告 · 滚动继续阅读
法官表示，该政策可能会扼杀传统的新闻采集方式。
“记者必须能够提问，”弗里德曼对司法部律师说。“你只需要说，‘出于国家安全考虑，我无法回答这个问题。’”
法官补充说，该政策赋予国防官员“不受约束的自由裁量权”，由他们决定哪些媒体机构可以获得进入五角大楼的通行证，以便参加新闻发布会、与官员会面和与消息人士交谈。
该政策于去年10月实施，是政府对特朗普声称存在偏见的主要媒体组织施加压力的一部分。
该政策要求记者承认，他们可能被视为安全风险，如果他们向国防部员工索要机密和某些类型的非机密信息，其五角大楼新闻徽章可能会被吊销。
由特朗普任命的国防部长彼得·黑格塞特(Pete Hegseth)领导的五角大楼在法庭文件中表示，该政策是“务实的”，并且“旨在保护国家安全，同时仍允许新闻界接触”。
弗里德曼驳斥了这一说法，称该政策可能会干扰受宪法保护的新闻自由。法官说，由于美国最近对委内瑞拉和伊朗进行了军事干预，对五角大楼的独立报道“比以往任何时候都更加重要”。
“这就是第一修正案的全部意义所在，”弗里德曼表示，他是由民主党前总统比尔·克林顿任命的。
该诉讼寻求法院命令阻止该政策，称这些限制违反了宪法第五修正案规定的正当程序权利以及第一修正案的保护。法官在听证会上没有作出裁决，但表示将迅速作出裁决。
至少有30家新闻机构，包括福克斯新闻、《华盛顿邮报》和路透社，因担心新闻自由受到威胁，选择放弃其新闻徽章。
在传统媒体机构大量撤离后，五角大楼组建了一个新的新闻团队，主要由亲特朗普的媒体机构和个人组成。
五角大楼在周五的听证会结束后拒绝置评。
特朗普在去年10月被问及该政策时告诉记者，黑格塞特“发现新闻界在世界和平以及我国安全方面非常具有破坏性”。
《纽约时报》提起的诉讼之前，美联社去年也提起了一起诉讼，起诉三名高级特朗普助手，原因是白宫限制了该新闻机构参加新闻发布会的机会。
在美联社决定继续使用墨西哥湾的既定名称，同时承认特朗普的行政令将其更名为“美洲湾”之后，白宫采取了这一行动。该诉讼仍在审理中。
报道：简·沃尔夫；编辑：威尔·邓纳姆
我们的标准：路透社信托原则，新标签页打开
Judge skeptical of Pentagon’s restrictions on press access
March 6, 2026 8:15 PM UTC / Reuters
By Jan Wolfe
节点运行失败
The Pentagon is seen from the air in Washington, U.S., March 3, 2022. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab
- Summary
- Companies
- New York Times challenged Pentagon press policy
- Judge questions constitutionality of Pentagon’s approach
- Judge did not rule from bench, but will act promptly
March 6 (Reuters) – A U.S. judge appeared on Friday likely to block the Pentagon’s restrictive new policy on press access that threatens journalists with being branded security risks if they ask Defense Department employees to disclose classified or some types of unclassified information.
U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman, hearing about two hours of arguments in Washington in a legal challenge filed by the New York Times, questioned lawyers for President Donald Trump’s administration on whether the policy ran afoul of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protections for press freedom and free speech.
Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
The judge indicated that the policy could stifle traditional newsgathering methods.
“Reporters have to be able to ask a question,” Friedman told the Justice Department lawyers. “All you have to do is say, ‘I can’t answer that question for national security reasons.’”
The judge added that the policy gives “unbridled discretion” to defense officials to decide which media outlets are granted building passes to the Pentagon that let them attend press briefings, meet with officials and speak with sources.
The policy, implemented in October, was part of the pressure being exerted by the administration on major media organizations that Trump has asserted are biased against him.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
The policy requires journalists to acknowledge that they could be deemed security risks and have their Pentagon press badges revoked if they ask Defense Department employees for classified and some types of unclassified information.
The Pentagon, headed by Trump appointee Pete Hegseth, has said in court filings that the policy is “pragmatic” and “calculated to protect national security while still allowing press access.”
Friedman pushed back on that claim, saying the policy could interfere with constitutionally protected press freedoms. The judge said independent reporting on the Pentagon is “more important than ever” because of the recent U.S. military interventions in Venezuela and Iran.
“That’s what the First Amendment is all about,” said Friedman, who was appointed by Democratic former President Bill Clinton.
The suit, which seeks a judicial order blocking the policy, called the restrictions a violation of the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment right to due process as well as the First Amendment protections. The judge did not issue a ruling during the hearing but said he would do so promptly.
At least 30 news organizations, including Fox News, the Washington Post and Reuters, chose to give up their press badges rather than sign the new policy, citing a threat to press freedoms.
Since the exodus of traditional media outlets, the Pentagon has assembled a new press corps consisting largely of pro-Trump outlets and individuals.
The Pentagon declined to comment after Friday’s hearing.
Asked in October about the policy, Trump told reporters that Hegseth “finds the press to be very disruptive in terms of world peace and maybe security for our nation.”
The case brought by the New York Times follows another one brought last year by the Associated Press against three senior Trump aides after the White House limited the news organization’s access to press gatherings.
The White House took the action after the AP decided to continue using the Gulf of Mexico’s established name, while acknowledging Trump’s executive order renaming it the Gulf of America. That lawsuit remains pending.
Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Will Dunham
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab
发表回复