A federal judge has ruled to allow President Donald Trump to ban the Associated Press from some press events following the media organization's decision to continue using the name "Gulf of Mexico" to refer to the body of water that Trump used an executive order to rename the Gulf of America.

Judge Trevor McFadden said he wanted more information about the events the AP was banned from and how many reporters are usually allowed into them before making a final decision on whether to uphold the ban permanently, but denied the preliminary injunction in the meanwhile.

McFadden said case law seems to be against the ban, but found no immediate reason to block it on Monday during a hearing.

Just because the AP "may have long received special media access to the president does not mean that such access is constitutionally compelled in perpetuity," the ruling read in part.

A privilege, not a right

The ruling is a win for Trump in the fight to get fair coverage of his actions.

"Asking the president of the United States questions in the Oval Office and aboard Air Force One is a privilege granted to journalists, not a legal right," the White House said in a statement about the ruling.

But the AP sees the case as a free speech issue, arguing that a lack of access is an affront to free speech.

"We look forward to our next hearing on March 20 where we will continue to stand for the right of the press and the public to speak freely without government retaliation," AP spokesperson Lauren Easton said in a statement.

No special treatment

White House deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles were named in the suit filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

It's hardly a new thing to restrict press access to the president. Former President Joe Biden at one point revoked 30% of the "hard passes" given to news organizations to attend daily briefings, which impacted more than 400 journalists (disproportionately conservative journalists, of course).

The AP is probably a bigger news organization than any of the ones Biden kicked out, but size should not matter if the AP is defying the law by deliberately misnaming a landmark.

Since when does the media get to misinform people on something as factual as this without any repercussions?

Without knowing exactly what guidelines exist about press access to the president, it just seems disingenuous that Biden was able to restrict over 400 journalists from having access to him while the same party is up in arms over Trump restricting one organization, however large.

What's good for one ought to be good for the other. It's basic fairness, but then, Democrats gave that up a long time ago.