In a clash of semantics and civil liberties, a U.S. appeals court has sided—at least for now—with the Trump administration, refusing to lift restrictions that block Associated Press journalists from attending White House events and boarding Air Force One.
At the center of this standoff? A name.
The AP’s crime, according to the administration: continuing to call a certain body of water the “Gulf of Mexico.” President Trump, through an executive order issued in January, decreed that all federal agencies refer to it as the “Gulf of America.” The AP declined the linguistic rebrand, citing over four centuries of global usage—and was promptly barred.
This week, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit left intact a June decision by a divided panel that permitted the White House to keep AP out—for now. The court declined to rehear the matter, potentially paving the road to the Supreme Court.
The AP, unsurprisingly, wasn’t pleased. In a statement, the wire service emphasized its commitment to press freedom and free speech, reiterating that “the press and the public have a fundamental right to speak freely without government retaliation.”
The White House, on the other hand, dismissed the entire lawsuit as “baseless,” accusing the AP of being “self-absorbed.”
The underlying case, still alive and now moving forward on a longer timeline, claims the administration violated First Amendment protections by denying access based on editorial choices. AP’s lawsuit, filed in February, argues that viewpoint discrimination—especially in access to public officials and spaces—can’t stand under constitutional scrutiny.
The wire service’s reasoning is grounded in both history and journalistic principle: its stylebook maintains that the Gulf of Mexico has been known as such for over 400 years, and as an international news organization, the AP intends to stick with it.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, had previously ruled in the AP’s favor, noting that once the White House grants access to some journalists, it can’t exclude others based on their opinions or language use. But that ruling was put on hold in June by a 2-1 vote from a panel featuring two Trump-appointed judges.
The appeals court hasn’t yet set a date for arguments on the full case. Meanwhile, news services like AP and Reuters remain vital lifelines for thousands of smaller outlets that depend on their pool reports for coverage of presidential events.
While the larger constitutional battle simmers, one thing is clear: in the halls of power, what you call a stretch of water can still make waves.
