Playboy's White House Reporter Is Suing Trump Over Suspended Press Access
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher’s Ted Boutrous filed the lawsuit on behalf of reporter Brian Karem
August 20, 2019 at 05:50 PM
6 minute read
Playboy White House correspondent and CNN political analyst Brian Karem sued the White House on Tuesday to get his hard pass back after it was suspended in the wake of a July Rose Garden confrontation with a former Trump official.
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partner Theodore Boutrous Jr. is representing Karem in the suit, filed in District Court for the District of Columbia. The complaint seeks a declaration that the suspension was unconstitutional, in addition to the full reinstatement of the Karem’s “hard pass,” which guarantees him daily access to the White House.
“This court should vacate the suspension and order that Karem’s hard pass be immediately restored,” the complaint said. “The suspension is arbitrary, unlawful, and unconstitutional.”
U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson of the District of Columbia has been assigned the case.
Boutrous, who represented CNN’s Jim Acosta in a similar case last year, first promised the lawsuit in a statement Friday. The attorney at the time called the suspension of Karem’s hard pass “yet another example of this administration’s unconstitutional campaign to punish reporters and press coverage that President Trump doesn’t like.”
In Tuesday’s lawsuit, Boutrous cited a lack of specific standards for behavior at the White House as showing that the suspension is unlawful.
Boutrous argues that White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham “did not cite any legal authority authorizing her to order the suspension of a hard pass and admitted that Mr. Karem did not violate any published rule or standard.”
“In the absence of such standards, the determination to suspend Karem’s pass came down to the unbounded post hoc discretion of one person regarding what conduct amounts to a breach of ‘decorum,’ eyebrow movements and all,” the complaint said.
And he said Karem was not “given a fair opportunity” to oppose Grisham’s initial decision to suspend his pass, calling the White House spokeswoman “a biased decision maker who works for a president at war with what he calls the ‘Lamestream media’ that are the ‘enemy of the people.’”
Boutrous further argued that Grisham’s “arbitrary” actions indicate that Karem’s “suspension is clearly meant to punish and deter his reporting on the administration rather than based on anything he said in the Rose Garden in July.”
“As such, the suspension is an impermissible content-based regulation of speech, and an attempt to censor the press and exclude from the White House reporters who challenge and dispute the President’s point of view,” the complaint said.
Grisham first informed Karem of the preliminary decision to suspend his hard pass Aug. 2, about three weeks after his confrontation with former White House aide Sebastian Gorka made headlines.
During a spat in the White House’s Rose Garden, Karem was filmed shouting at Gorka to “go outside and have a long talk.” Gorka then crossed over to where Karem was standing, yelling that the CNN political analyst is a “punk.”
The two men interacted again inside the White House minutes later, where Karem asked for a handshake. Gorka, who was forced out of the Trump administration two years ago, refused and yelled at Karem, “you’re done!”
In an Aug. 5 letter responding to the initial decision, Boutrous argued that the hard pass couldn’t be revoked under Grisham’s claim that there are “widely shared understanding[s]” about how the media should behave at the White House, and that a more formal set of guidelines needs to be in place in order to determine that Karem violated them.
And he also alleged that Grisham deprived Karem of his due process rights by deciding to suspend the Playboy correspondent’s pass without giving the reporter an opportunity to respond.
“[Y]ou decided instead to single out Mr. Karem for retaliation even while the president celebrates those, including Mr. Gorka, who have behaved far worse,” Boutrous wrote, referring to a tweet from President Donald Trump about the incident. “This exhibits a clear and prohibited bias based on content of speech and identity of the speaker.”
Karem also provided a statement to the White House, maintaining that he is known among the press corps for his impersonations, like that of Rodney Dangerfield, and that is what he was doing during the altercation in an attempt to defuse the situation with Gorka.
But in her Aug. 16 letter making the final decision to suspend the pass, Grisham was adamant that Karem behaved unprofessionally during the incident.
“Under the circumstances, Mr. Karem’s words and gestures together created the impression to a reasonable observer that Mr. Karem was suggesting a physical confrontation,” Grisham wrote.
She pointed to an interview with a Secret Service agent who intervened on the scene, who apparently told the press secretary that he intervened because he “believed there was a risk of a physical altercation.”
Grisham also said she doesn’t find Karem’s claim that he was doing a Dangerfield impression “credible,” as she didn’t think “any reasonable observer would have seen anything about Mr. Karem’s choice of words, mannerisms, or inflection that remotely evoked Rodney Dangerfield.”
“An insult to guests is still an insult even if delivered while mimicking a comedian,” she added.
The press secretary also pushed back against Boutrous’s claims that suspending Karem’s press pass was in response to the content of his reporting, calling the allegations “baseless.”
“The very fact that the president has continued to call on Mr. Karem demonstrates that there has been no effort to silence his journalism,” Grisham wrote.
This lawsuit sets up a redux of the case last year over the suspension of the hard pass for Acosta, CNN’s White House correspondent.
Boutrous successfully argued against the suspension of Acosta’s hard pass in November 2018, with U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly of the District of Columbia granting a temporary restraining order that reinstated the credential for two weeks.
The White House then agreed to restore Acosta’s pass, but said it was adding new restrictions for reporters at press conferences.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRepublican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
4 minute readCars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
'Water Cooler Discussions': US Judge Questions DOJ Request in Google Search Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250