Washington, D.C., March 20, 2026—The Committee to Protect Journalists is heartened by a United States District Court decision on Friday in the case of New York Times v. Pentagon, in which the judge decided in favor of the newspaper, and calls on the Pentagon to heed the court’s decision and abandon last year’s changes to its credentialing process.
In the ruling, the court wrote that given recent U.S. military involvement in Venezuela and Iran, “it is more important than ever that the public have access to information from a variety of perspectives about what its government is doing.”
“This ruling in favor of the New York Times is an important step in restoring journalists’ access to the Pentagon. As the court noted, recent United States military activity in Venezuela and Iran make journalists’ access all the more critical,” said CPJ U.S., Canada, and Caribbean Program Coordinator Katherine Jacobsen. “While the news media and journalists in the United States are facing unprecedented pressures, it is vital that the courts uphold freedom of the press as they did today.”
The Defense Department introduced a new accreditation policy in September 2025 and updated it in October allowing the Department to deny or revoke a Pentagon press pass when a journalist reports on information beyond what the agency has approved for public release.
On October 15, the vast majority of Pentagon reporters gave up their credentials in response to the restrictions. The New York Times filed its suit in December 2025.
CPJ joined an amicus brief, authored by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP), in support of the New York Times’s lawsuit against the United States Department of Defense’s recent restrictions on press access to the Pentagon. The brief argues that the freedom for reporters to ask questions of military personnel is crucial to reporting in the public interest. It also outlines how the new policy pressures reporters to tailor coverage out of fear of reprisal from Pentagon decision-makers and losing access — which is both legally impermissible and a significant blow to a free press.
Additionally, CPJ wrote a letter to the United States Assistant to the Secretary of War for Public Affairs warning that limiting press access suppresses freedom of speech.