Part 2/6:
The AP presented an argument asserting that their exclusion from prominent White House spaces was a violation of their constitutional rights, particularly the First Amendment. They contended that this restriction inflicted irreparable harm and urged the court to consider the public interest in having unrestricted access to presidential communications and events.
In their request, the AP lawyers highlighted that they believed they were likely to prevail on the merits of their case, suggesting that the administration's actions were unjust and harmful to their journalistic integrity. They claimed this ban impeded their ability to serve the public's right to know and was especially egregious given that other media outlets continued to maintain access.