BREAKING: Judge drops BOMBSHELL ruling against Trump & Hegseth

You're watching the Legal Breakdown. Glenn, we have a major ruling here from. a federal judge in a case that's going. to have major implications on how this. administration is covered, specifically. regarding the Pentagon. Can you explain. what just happened in court? Yeah, Brian, it turns out that Pete Hegseth. doesn't get to control the media or the. information flow coming out of the. Pentagon. And now it's more important. than ever, given that we are literally. in an unlawful and unconstitutional. war. So, Pete Hegseth decided that he.

would ban reporters that displease him, kind of like his boss Donald Trump tries. to, you know, ban news outlets that. displease him or law firms that. displease him or universities that. displease him. I guess Pete Hegseth. thought he would, you know, have a go at. being, you know, a little second-level. dictator. The The problem is we've got. this pesky First Amendment freedom of. the press. And so, Pete Hegseth tried to. basically ban any reporters and any news.

organizations that, you know, he thought. were unfriendly. He might claim unfair, but, you know, he wanted to ban things. like The New York Times. And so, The. Times and one of its reporters decided. to bring suit, claiming that this. violated the First Amendment, it. violated Fifth Amendment due process, it. violated the Administrative Procedures. Act. And we just got a a really. important opinion, particularly when the. nation is at war, saying that, you know,

Pete Hegseth cannot control the. information flow so that he only gets to. pick those news outlets, I don't know, like Fox or others that, you know, may. be interested in reporting the news with. a a certain bent to it. Let me just read. for our viewers the first couple of. sentences because this kind of sets the. tone for this lengthy opinion. The judge. says, "A primary purpose of the First. Amendment is to enable the press to. publish what it will and the public to.

read what it chooses free of any. official proscription. In other words, free of governmental prohibitions on. what we get to read. Those who drafted. the First Amendment believed that the. nation's security requires a free press. and an informed people and that such. security is endangered by governmental. suppression of political speech. That. principle has preserved the nation's.

security for almost 250 years and it. must not be abandoned now. So, the the. judge opened with this is all about not. only an informed population, but the. security of our nation. And when, you. know, is that more important? When is it. at its zenith if not at a time where. where we are in an unjustifiable and. unconstitutional war? So, what happens to all of those news.

outlets who refused to to kowtow to this. administration and sign their their. little press pledge or whatever it was. um that have been basically barred from. the Pentagon? Does that mean that the. floodgates are now reopened? That those. news outlets have the right to go back. in and cover this in the same way that. all of these cherry-picked right-wing. outlets have? Yeah, Brian. Even though. this suit was brought by The New York. Times and one of its reporters, I think. the principle announced, you know, the. ruling of the judge will apply to all.

news outlets. So, you know, those um. news organizations that were barred by. Hegseth, I think they are going to have. to be given their press passes and their. access to the Pentagon briefing room. again. Now, Pete Hegseth could, you. know, violate the spirit of this. judicial ruling and say, "Well, you. know, it only pertains to the times. because that was the litigant in the. case. I don't think that dog will hunt. and I have a feeling the Pentagon will. now try to retool its policies. They.

will probably engage in some other. shenanigans. I can't imagine they're. willing to just fully comply with a. court order that they really don't like. But but for right now it looks like all. of the reporters that were banned. previously should be given access again. And let's and let's face it Brian, we. heard some reporting that you know Pete. Hegseth part of what was upsetting him. so about the the press coverage that he. was receiving is he didn't like.

photographs of himself. There were. unflattering. pictures of him. You know I want to say, you know, look Pete, you don't have all. that many good angles to begin with. Glenn, it's worth asking here because. this administration always engages in. this. Is there avenue for for them to. appeal this case up to a higher court? Do you think Do you think that that's. even a worthwhile step for them to take? You know, rarely does the Trump. administration settle for a trial court.

opinion. They almost always not all. always but almost always appeal it. And. this ruling is what's called a summary. judgment. What does that mean? Usually. you have a trial on the merits but. sometimes when the legal issue is so. clear that you really don't need to call. witnesses, you don't need to take. testimony. You don't need to resolve. disputes of fact. It is disputes of fact. that get resolved in the trial and then. the law will be applied to the facts. that the court or the jury finds. But.

here both parties filed motions for. summary judgment. In other words, that. was both parties, the government and the. New York Times saying, "Listen, the. facts are what they what they are. We. were barred. We were prohibited from. continuing to exercise our First. Amendment freedom of the press rights. And so each party said they were. entitled to win as a matter of law. Well, the judge decided, yeah, the the. Pentagon, Pete Hegseth, the government.

loses as a matter of law because again. of that pesky First Amendment right of. freedom of the press. And so what will. happen now is they'll have to make a. decision, do we want to try to take it. up to the court of appeals? I think it. will be completely fruitless for them to. challenge this, but that doesn't mean. the Trump administration, you know, won't keep trying to push this. this rock up the hill, which really is a. rock that is designed to block the First. Amendment freedom of the press. Well,

look, this is this is a a feature, not a. bug of this administration. This. administration has spent all of its. political capital in trying to suppress. the voices of of those who have. something critical to say about them. They've done it to comedians, whether. it's Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel. They've wielded the FCC. as as widely as they can against any. news organizations. Just Just this week. they approved a merger of Nexstar and. Tegna that would basically make it so.

that more than 80% of households in this. country are now seeing local news that. has a rightward slant that's owned by. one of those two companies. And that's. not to mention Sinclair, which is. another. company that own parent company of local. news outlets that also is a. right-leaning company. So their goal. here, as they as they allow this process to. play out, is to make sure that the only. voices that you get in your media are. are right-wing voices. That's it. They. they are working to stamp out any.

pro-democracy or left-wing voices in the. entire ecosystem, whether it's on the. radio, whether it's on TV, whether it's. on the internet. And so I'm just going. to take this opportunity right here, given the excellent work that Glenn. does, given the work that I try to do on. a daily basis, if you'd like to support. our work, if you'd like to support. independent media, the best way to do. that is to subscribe to both of our. channels. It's 100% free to do so, but a. great way to make sure that even as the. Trump administration continues to stamp. out any dissenting voices, that we have. the opportunity to reach you. So, I'm.

going to put the links to both of our. channels in the post description of this. video. Again, if you're not yet. subscribed, please do us a favor, help. elevate our voices, and subscribe. But Glenn, the the the point remains. that Donald Trump has done everything he. can, everything in his power, and even. those things that are not in his power, to make sure that any dissenting voices. aren't able to exist in this ecosystem. Yeah, Brian, and let me give voice to. something that has been gnawing at me. ever since I saw this ruling come out. You know, Pete Hegseth is a reckless.

hack. He is somebody who basically is. trying to sideline all of the legal. advisers in the military. That would be. the Judge Advocate Generals, the JAGs, the Army lawyers. I know because I was. one on active duty for 6 and 1/2 years, and it was my sworn duty to give the. command advice that would keep them out. of hot water. Keep all decisions and. operations on the lawful side of the.

line. Pete Hegseth doesn't like that. I. think he said, you know, it was an. impediment to maximum lethality. You. know, you don't think of the rule of law. as being an impediment to anything. You. know, it it's there for a reason. Here. is my concern at this point. I've been. waiting for the Trump administration to. tell a federal court, you know, F off, we're not going to abide by your ruling. And this is one where I think there is a. risk of Pete Hegseth, lawless hack that.

he is, and he thinks he's a strong man, even though really nobody is weaker uh. than Pete Hegseth. I it wouldn't shock. me if he said, "Okay, federal court, you're telling me I have to let all of. these other journalists into my. Pentagon? Make me." Because, you know, he's the one with all the military toys. and all the firepower. I hope to hell it. doesn't come to that, Brian. I know this. administration has flirted with um. violating court orders, and they.

actually have violated a a number of. court orders, particularly in. immigration cases. Um I just hope it. doesn't come to that, and I hope, you. know, somebody in this administration. has the good sense to say, "All right, the federal courts have spoken. It is a. blatant constitutional violation for us. to block the New York Times and other. respectable uh news outlets from. Pentagon briefings. Let's just go ahead. Let's chalk this up as a loss, and let's. keep, you know, moving forward in our.

unconstitutional war." And by the way, I. hope that some of these right-wing. outlets who are able to cover the. Pentagon right now do what the left-wing. outlets did when there was an issue with. Fox being able to enter the briefing. room during during the Obama. administration, which is to uh join. together and recognize that the press is. only as strong as its weakest link. And. so, if there isn't press access for one. organization, there shouldn't be press. access for any of the It's basically. tantamount to there not being press. access for any organization. And so, if.

these right-wing outlets had any sense, any integrity, that's what they would. do. It remains whether that would. actually happen, uh and my hopes. certainly aren't aren't aren't very. high. But, at least in these instances. where we have a court ruling mandating. that these other outlets, including the. New York Times, be given access to the. Pentagon again, even these right-wing. outlets have a vested interest because, you know, they they don't want to be in. a situation where when the shoe is on. the other foot, they were the ones who. established a precedent of saying, "Oh, only the only the political affiliation.

of the the party in power should have a. say over who gets to cover this stuff. That's not the kind of precedent we want. to establish and right now those. outlets, those right-wing outlets have. the power to push back against that. precedent so that they're not in a. position where when the shoe is on the. other foot, they're left out in the. cold. And let's face it. Do we believe. for a minute that Donald Trump wouldn't. turn on any number of these right-wing. outlets if they just happened to. broadcast one story that displeased dear.

leader? You know, Donald Trump is not. big on loyalty. Right, perfectly put. Again, for those who are watching, if. you'd like to follow along and support. what we're doing in the independent. media space, if you'd like to stay on. top of all legal news, the best way to. do that is to subscribe to both of our. channels. I'm going to put those links. right here on the screen and also in the. post description of this video. 100%. free to subscribe, but a great way to. amplify our voices and support our work. I'm Brian Tyler Cohen. And I'm Glenn. Kirschner. You're watching the legal breakdown. >> [music].