CNN, MS NOW and Politico have filed a federal lawsuit seeking to restore their journalists’ access to the White House.

The organisations were barred after President Donald Trump accused them of producing unfavourable and false coverage.

Their legal complaint argues that the decision violated constitutional protections for freedom of the press and denied them due process.

The lawsuit says the administration punished the organisations because of their editorial content. It asks the court to act quickly and restore access while the broader case is considered.

The White House disputes the allegation that it has violated press freedom. Its position is that the First Amendment protects publication but does not automatically entitle a news organisation to a press credential, briefing-room seat or place in the presidential media pool.

Physical space around a president is limited. News organisations therefore share responsibility for collecting video, photographs and written observations through a rotating press pool.

The five major television networks have traditionally taken turns supplying footage that is then distributed to other broadcasters and the wider press corps.

CNN was removed from a scheduled pool assignment following the ban. Other networks declined to replace it, leaving presidential events without the normal shared television coverage.

The dispute therefore extends beyond whether an individual reporter can enter the White House. It affects whether the public receives independently collected video and first hand reporting from locations where only a small number of journalists can be present.

Governments can establish security and logistical rules for press access. The central question is whether officials can exclude particular organisations because they dislike the content of their reporting.

The news organisations argue that viewpoint based punishment is unconstitutional. The administration argues that access to restricted presidential areas remains a privilege subject to White House control.

Previous disputes involving the Associated Press and former CNN correspondent Jim Acosta may influence the legal arguments, although the circumstances are not identical.

The lawsuit names the president and senior officials responsible for communications, security and White House operations.

No final judicial ruling has yet been made. Claims contained in the lawsuit remain allegations unless accepted by the court.

The outcome could establish an important precedent governing how future administrations manage access to the president and whether political objections can be used to exclude established news organisations.