The New York Times files new lawsuit against Pentagon

The New York Times and its national security correspondent Julian E. Barnes have filed a lawsuit against the Pentagon, accusing the department of restricting press access to military officials and the Department of Defence headquarters, according to a new report by the publication.

Also named as defendants in the case are Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, his adviser Timothy Parlatore, and spokesperson Sean Parnell.

According to the plaintiffs, new rules requiring journalists to visit the Pentagon only when accompanied by department personnel violate constitutional guarantees of free speech and due process rights.

Journalists must, under a policy the department adopted in March, “call or email for an appointment, wait for a response, get an escort, ask their question,” and then leave the building. The lawsuit is seeking a court order that would compel the Pentagon to remove this restriction.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the filing was an effort by The New York Times to obtain “their hands on classified information.”

“The department’s policy is completely lawful and narrowly designed to protect national security information from unlawful criminal disclosure,” Parnell added.

This is the second lawsuit the newspaper has filed against the US military department. Earlier, in December, The Times sued the Pentagon on the grounds that the restrictions violated the First and Fifth Amendment rights of its journalists.

In March, US District Judge Paul Friedman ruled in favour of The Times, striking down major parts of the October policy. Shortly afterwards, the Pentagon introduced an “interim” policy requiring official escorts for all visits, along with other changes, and also shut down the long-established press workspace inside the Pentagon.

Judge Friedman later invalidated the core of the interim policy as well, but the Pentagon appealed and asked a higher court to allow the escort requirement to stay in effect while litigation continued. In April, a divided three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit permitted the escort rule to remain in place during the ongoing appeal.

By Jeyhun Aghazada