The Pentagon’s New Press Rules: Protecting Security or Silencing the Press?
Members of Pentagon press corp carrying their belongings out of the Pentagon after turning in their press credentials on Wednesday October 15, 2025. From Kevin Wolf at The Associated Press.
By Willa Mack ‘29
A Divisive, New Memorandum
On May 23, 2025, the Pentagon released guidelines to limit journalists’ physical access to the building and their ability to report information without explicit Pentagon approval. This move generated much political division, with critics stating that these guidelines limit press freedom. These guidelines were later recirculated to the press and senior Pentagon leadership on September 18th, stating that reporters had two weeks until 5:00 PM on October 14th to agree to the new terms or lose their Pentagon access. A big jump from the one-page list of rules in place since the Eisenhower administration, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s new press guidelines span 21 pages, severely restricting physical press access in the building, as well as establishing new standards for printing information, classified or not.
Pentagon reporters who signed would “pledge” to exclusively publish information that has been approved for public release by an “authorizing [Pentagon] official before it is released, even if it is unclassified.” If journalists print unapproved information, their press pass would be put in jeopardy.
Not only is content approved for distribution now limited, but the press’s physical access to the building has also been severely restricted. Previously, Pentagon reporters had unescorted access through most of the building’s five floors; now, they are only able to move freely in certain areas of the first and second. Photographic and videographic opportunities have also been strictly limited. In the National 9/11 Pentagon Memorial, for instance, the general public are allowed to use cameras whereas journalists are not. First Amendment advocates note that the Pentagon treating journalists less favorably than the public is “inherently suspect.”
In all, Department of War (DoW) officials claim these new measures are necessary to reduce the possibility of unauthorized or accidental military disclosures. Many accept the merit of the rules for protecting national security, but media organizations, politicians, journalists, and First Amendment advocates worry these heightened restrictions are a form of censorship. Some are also concerned that these guidelines will stall the flow of information from the Pentagon to the public and pressure reporters to cover Pentagon operations as the DoW and larger administration want them to be depicted.
Responses to New Guidelines
Citing the new policy as a threat to press freedom and independent reporting on the military, over 30 news organizations—including Reuters, The New York Times, NBC News, CBS News, ABC News, CNN, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, NPR, and The Associated Press—have refused to sign. CBS News ended its over-60-year presence in the Pentagon, having been reporting there since the 1940s. Even conservative media outlet Fox News, Secretary Hegseth’s previous employer, refused to sign the new guidelines.
Only 15 reporters remain in the Pentagon, all of whom are either freelancers or who work for traditionally conservative news outlets who have consistently supported President Trump—such as One America News, The Federalist, and the Epoch Times—or foreign media members.
On the Hill, politicians on both sides of the aisle have voiced criticism. Republican representative Don Bacon of Nebraska called the new guidelines “dumb,” and Democratic Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island said Hegseth’s efforts are trying to make journalists “mere stenographers for the party in power [and] the Pentagon itself.” Former Pentagon spokesman John Ullyot called the restrictions “Soviet-style.”
Legal Implications
The legal basis of the new press restrictions is murky. Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell claims the new rules are aligned with the “common-sense guidelines” found at other American military bases and are the “best” choice for national security. However, Seth Stern, Director of Advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, considers them “an affront to the First Amendment.”
Reporters have had access to the Pentagon since it opened in 1943, and Hegseth’s new guidelines are the biggest change in media access to the Pentagon building and officials in about 70 years. Although there is no constitutional right that guarantees journalists access to government buildings, modern case law has established that once physical access to buildings has been granted, it cannot be taken away without due process.
The memorandum’s Security Risks section is considered the greatest area of legal uncertainty. It notes that “actively soliciting or encouraging government employees to break the law” is not protected by the First Amendment and warrants punishment, including the possible revocation of press credentials.
However, this leads many to beg the question: how are journalists supposed to know if they are “soliciting” Pentagon employees to break the law? Journalists ask questions they do not know the answer to, and the responses—which are out of their control—can range from revealing unclassified information (ex. “no”) to disclosing highly sensitive information, such as military plans or troop locations.
As Adam Goldstein of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) points out, the memorandum does not effectively define “solicitation,” thus investing “a lot of discretion” into the DoW to decide what violates the new restrictions. Goldstein is wary of letting Hegseth, who—according to President Trump—considers the press to be “very dishonest,” determine violations. Furthermore, Goldstein thinks this ambiguity is intended to position journalists as scapegoats if and when government employees leak information. This raises the possibility of punishment if reporters even just request information on public interest matters the DoW considers “sensitive.” FIRE explains this provision is not based in any actual law and instead undermines well-established First Amendment precedent.
Larger Themes and Patterns
These new restrictions are the most recent move of the Trump administration to restrict the media’s ability to freely report on the federal government. Since his second inauguration, President Trump has sued The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, ABC News, CBS News, and more. In February, the White House banned The Associated Press from press pools with special access to the president, in a move similar to what the Pentagon memorandum outlines.
Hegseth in late January removed four outlets from the DoW’s Pentagon workspaces in favor of reporters from more conservative news sources and, since his swearing-in, has held only two formal Pentagon press briefings, while launching numerous investigations into potential leaks. In comparison to his predecessors—whom, no matter their political persuasion, generally held biweekly press briefings—Hegseth has choked off the flow of information from the Pentagon to the public.
When the new guidelines were first announced in May, Mike Balasmo, president of the National Press Club, wrote in a press release that “independent, fact-based reporting on the US military isn’t a luxury. It is a necessity.” Nearly five months later, on October 13, Secretary Hegseth directly contradicted Balasmo in a post on X: “Pentagon access is a privilege, not a right.”