The New York Times Company, et al. v. Department of Defense, et al.

Washington, D.C. constitutional law lawyers sued the Defendants on civil rights violation theories.

The New York Times (“The Times”) and its reporter Julian E. Barnes brought a lawsuit to preserve and defend First Amendent principles against overzealous actions by the
Secretary of Defense and the Department he leads.

The Plaintiffs filed a motion for
summary judgment seeking an order vacating, declaring unconstitutional, and permanently enjoining the enforcement of certain provisions of a policy newly implemented by the United States Department of Defense (the “Department”). The plaintiffs argued that those provisions
violate their rights under the First and Fifth Amendments and are contrary to the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”).

Defendants the Department, Pete Hegseth in his official capacity as Secretary of Defense, and Sean Parnell in his official capacity as Chief Pentagon Spokesman have filed a cross-motion for summary judgment.

This case centered on Pentagon Facilities Alternate Credentials (“PFACs”), press
credentials that members of the media are issued to access the Pentagon. For
decades, journalists from news organizations across the country have covered the Department from the Pentagon’s grounds, which they have accessed using their PFACs.

The New York Times is one such news organization. For more than forty years, multiple Times reporters with PFACs have worked regularly at the Pentagon. Id. Having a consistent presence at the Pentagon has enabled and enhanced the ability of the plaintiffs and other journalists to report on the Department and its leadership during some of the most consequential moments in American history. For The Times, having journalists with access to the Pentagon has enhanced the depth, detail, quality, and accuracy of its coverage of the Department, the U.S. military, and national security issues.

Motion granted.