Former Vice President Kamala Harris has criticized President Donald Trump’s decision to bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, calling the move “absolutely abhorrent” and accusing the president of trying to restrict journalists’ ability to report on his administration.

Harris made the comments on Tuesday, September 22, 2026, when she was approached by reporters while getting into a car. Asked about the White House media restrictions, she said Trump was afraid of the public hearing what journalists had to say about his government.

According to CBS News, Harris said Trump was “afraid of the voice of the people” and argued that the president was attempting to prevent journalists from informing Americans about the actions of his administration.

Her remarks came days after Trump announced that CNN, MS NOW and Politico would no longer be allowed inside the White House. Trump accused the organizations of repeatedly publishing what he described as “fake news” and suggested that other media outlets could face similar restrictions.

The three organizations subsequently had their reporters’ White House access revoked. CNN reporter Betsy Klein, MS NOW reporter Akayla Gardner and Politico reporter Cheyenne Haslett were among those who were denied entry and had their credentials deactivated or confiscated.

Trump has defended the restrictions, saying the affected outlets had produced coverage he considered false or unfair.

When he announced the ban on September 18, Trump said the decision was based on what he characterized as cumulative reporting over several years rather than a single article or incident. He also indicated that other organizations could potentially be affected.

The White House has maintained that the restrictions concern access rather than preventing the organizations from covering the administration altogether. The affected news organizations, however, argue that removing their White House credentials interferes with their ability to perform their journalistic duties.

The dispute has now moved into federal court.

CNN, MS NOW and Politico filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on September 21, arguing that the White House ban violates their First Amendment rights and was imposed in retaliation for coverage the administration disliked. The organizations are seeking a temporary restraining order that would restore their access.

The lawsuit comes as the administration’s relationship with several major news organizations remains contentious. The White House has previously faced legal challenges over restrictions placed on journalists, including a dispute involving the Associated Press.

The restrictions also affected the White House television press pool.

CNN had been scheduled to serve as the pool’s representative for one of Trump’s events, but its camera operators and audio personnel were unable to enter the White House grounds. The other major television networks subsequently suspended pooled television coverage in response to the situation.

The controversy has therefore expanded beyond the three targeted organizations, raising questions about how the White House manages access for journalists who cover the president.

The legality of the restrictions is now being considered through the federal court process. Legal experts and press organizations have raised First Amendment concerns, while the administration has defended its authority to control access to White House facilities and events.

The next stage of the case could determine whether CNN, MS NOW and Politico regain their previous access while the broader lawsuit proceeds.

Meanwhile, the three organizations have said they will continue reporting on the Trump administration despite the restrictions.

Kamala Harris has joined the growing public debate over Trump’s decision to restrict White House access for CNN, MS NOW and Politico, describing the move as “absolutely abhorrent” and questioning the administration’s treatment of the press.

With the three organizations now challenging the restrictions in federal court, the dispute has become both a media-access controversy and a constitutional legal battle. The court proceedings will determine how the restrictions develop and whether the affected journalists are allowed to return to the White House.