President Donald Trump has secured another significant victory against a mainstream media organization.

A federal appeals court has intervened to halt a lower court’s ruling that would have required the White House to grant Associated Press (AP) reporters access to high-level press events.

In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit temporarily stayed an earlier order issued by Judge Trevor McFadden in April, which mandated that the Trump administration must allow AP journalists into the Oval Office, on Air Force One, and at other official events while their lawsuit was underway.

The AP filed the lawsuit after being denied access, alleging that the Trump administration retaliated against them for continuing to use the term “Gulf of Mexico” instead of adopting the administration’s preferred “Gulf of America.” AP attorneys argued the exclusion violated the First Amendment and constituted censorship.

However, President Trump’s legal team maintained that the president has broad discretion over which media organizations are allowed into the White House, particularly in restricted or high-security areas. They contended that Judge McFadden’s order exceeded judicial authority by undermining that presidential discretion.

“The Constitution does not prohibit the President from considering a journalist’s prior coverage in evaluating how much access he will grant that journalist,” one of the administration’s attorneys wrote in a court filing.

On April 16, the AP accused the administration of violating the court’s order by continuing to bar its journalists from select events and subsequently limiting access for all wire services, including Reuters and Bloomberg. “Reuters and the AP both issued statements denouncing the new policy, which puts wire services in a larger rotation with about 30 other newspaper and print outlets,” Reuters reported.

In its ruling, the appeals court stated, “We grant in part the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal. The White House is likely to succeed on the merits because these restricted presidential spaces are not First Amendment fora opened for private speech and discussion.

“The White House therefore retains discretion to determine, including on the basis of viewpoint, which journalists will be admitted. Moreover, without a stay, the government will suffer irreparable harm because the injunction impinges on the President’s independence and control over his private workspaces,” the decision continued.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression responded critically to the ruling in a press release.

“The D.C. Circuit’s flawed reasoning allows the White House to get away with blatant viewpoint discrimination against media outlets it doesn’t like. Even more troubling, the court downplays First Amendment protections for newsgathering, troublingly claiming that ‘newsgathering is not itself a communicative activity,’” the organization stated in a post on X.

“If you’re scratching your head at that one, you’re not alone. The district court’s initial ruling got it right: The White House does not have to grant press access to everyone, but once it opens its doors to some journalists, it cannot exclude others simply because it doesn’t like their views or reporting,” the statement added.

“We encourage the Associated Press to keep fighting to vindicate not only its own First Amendment rights, but those of every media outlet,” the group urged.

Earlier in February, Trump had made his stance clear—he would only consider lifting the AP ban if the outlet agreed to update its style guide and refer to the body of water as the “Gulf of America.”

“We’re going to keep them out until such time that they agree that it’s the Gulf of America,” he told reporters.

“I do think that some of the phrases they want to use are ridiculous, and I think, frankly, they’ve become obsolete,” Trump added.