Cynthia Davis: Judge's decision was wrong; CNN should have sent reporters with better manners

(The following column is written by former Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O'Fallon, now an internet radio talk show.)

When you're thinking about your blessings this Thanksgiving, remember to thank God that we have a great Country with a great Constitution. We just need to use the Constitution more. There are some reasons to be concerned about the latest judicial ruling concerning a press pass.

The executive branch of government has a right to make rules. The purpose of the press conference is to dispense information to the reporters! There's no law requiring the Executive to host press conferences at all, much less who can be invited.

When I was in office, I could decide if I wanted to talk to reporters and select which ones. For reporters, information is critical. Without access to the White House, reporters have no news to report. A press briefing benefits the journalists. For the journalists, no new facts means there is no new story.

 

It's not a "Town Hall" meeting. It's not the local water hole. It's not a focus group to understand opposing philosophies. It is not your high school debate club!

If Acosta --- OR ANY REPORTER --- speaks out of turn or is rude, the White House has the right to ask him to leave and not come back, especially if he refuses to relinquish the microphone. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press --- some of the rights articulated in the First Amendment, gives the reporters a right to print anything they want to print. It does not give reporters the right to a taxpayer-funded microphone!

If the story had ended with the reporter losing his press pass, we would have little to discuss. I thought it was laughable that a reporter sued the White House --- up until the judge sided with the reporter. We now have serious Constitutional concerns.

1.) CNN had access to the briefing because it could have sent other reporters ---- ones with better manners. 50 of them have press passes just from CNN!!! This incident was not directed at CNN. It was directed to the one individual who was unruly.

2.) The judge who restored the press pass was appointed by Donald Trump. This teaches us that even judges appointed by Republicans cannot be trusted to limit their branch and may attempt to legislate from the bench.

3.) The judicial branch of government cannot tell the executive branch how to run itself. Therefore, the executive branch could rightfully disregard this judge's ruling. When the judicial branch tries to make itself the strongest branch of government, we must remember --- it is not superior to the other branches! We must consciously work to contain it or it will overtake the other two branches.

When I was in the House of Representatives, the doormen had the power to remove anyone from the Chambers for disorderly conduct. The reporter was being disorderly. Judge Kelly based his ruling on the fifth amendment of the Constitution, not the First Amendment. Among other protections, the Fifth Amendment states that people cannot be denied their life, liberty or property without due process. The reporter was not denied any of these, so this is not a Constitutional issue. Where's the due process for the unborn?

Some reporters wish they were celebrities. If being belligerent can achieve fame, he got what he wanted out of it. The tone of his questions did not reflect a desire to understand facts. He was attempting to shame the White House for its public policies. The lines have become blurred between news articles and editorials. Wouldn't it be great if reporters received their satisfaction from reporting news instead of trying to make the news!