WND files appeal
with Dodd, Hastert

WASHINGTON – WorldNetDaily.com Inc. has formally called upon the Senate Rules and Administration Committee to reverse a Jan. 29 decision by the Standing Committee of Correspondents for the Senate Press Gallery to deny the newssite permanent press credentials.

In an appeal brief filed earlier this week with Rules chairman Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., WND's legal team argues that the Standing Committee violated the newssite's constitutional rights as a member of the free press by discriminating against it on political grounds.

TRENDING: Athlete files lawsuit alleging she was forced off team for refusing to kneel

"The halls of Congress should not be used as a workshop for dismantling the First Amendment," wrote WND counsel Richard D. Ackerman, who requested a hearing before the Rules panel.

A copy of the 31-page brief also was sent to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., who shares governing authority over the press galleries.

Ackerman, a public-interest litigator with the United States Justice Foundation, argues that the Standing Committee also violated WND's due-process and equal-protection rights.

In addition, he says, the powerful quasi-governmental panel of journalists – which picks which media can freely cover Congress – broke rules set by the House and Senate.

First Amendment violation

RELATED: Mt. Rushmore speech rules challenged

Ackerman says the Standing Committee – composed of five members who work for Reuters, Cox Newspapers, Knight Ridder, Bloomberg News and the Columbus Dispatch – acted out of disdain for what it perceives to be the conservative bent of WND.

"The denial of application in this case was spurred by content-based discrimination because of political views," he argued.

He points to a list of research items used by the committee to evaluate WND. The two-page list (page one and page two) was the only material turned over to WND's legal team for its April 15 appeal, despite a written request for all documents related to the popular newssite's case.

"The materials provided by Mr. (Frank) Wiggins (the Standing Committee's counsel) make replete reference to stories about 'conservatism,' 'Larry Klayman,' 'conspiracism,' 'the New Right,' '[c]onservative bent,' '[c]ulture war,' 'Judicial Watch,' and other references to what is commonly associated with conservatism," Ackerman noted.

He says that content-based discrimination is, per se, a violation of the First Amendment – which states, in part, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." Ackerman cites several case precedents in the brief.

"What is unlawful about the committee's reliance on the materials listed by Mr. Wiggins is that there was a specific focus on the content of certain materials written by WorldNetDaily's staff," he said. "The content was, in part or whole, used as an admitted basis for denial of the application."

"The committee's actions are content- and viewpoint-based forms of discrimination," Ackerman asserted. "Such discriminatory behavior is unconstitutional."

By excluding WND from the press gallery, Ackerman says the Standing Committee has restricted its free exercise of fundamental press rights. Specifically, the newssite, with more than 2.5 million readers, has been denied the following benefits and privileges afforded more than 300 other daily news organizations (some of them owned by totalitarian foreign governments, such as Beijing and Cairo):

• Permanent access to press work space
• Access to legislators and staff
• Files concerning the history and actions of the legislature
• Access to official schedules and notices
• Copies of roll call votes
• Copies of hearing testimony
• Meaningful use of press phone booths and desks
• Immediate access to Senate views
• Immediate access to relevant press releases
• Other benefits such as admission to the Republican National Convention, Democratic National Convention, presidential inauguration, state of the union addresses and other national events of high priority to news publishing.

"The interest at stake here is the right of a news reporter to gather information from the proceedings of the House and Senate," Ackerman said. "Nothing could be closer to the core of freedom of the press."

Yet, "what is most shameful about this case is the fact that the violations of the Constitution are coming from the very heart of our American democracy," he noted. "It seems almost unimaginable that fellow members of the press, operating as state actors on the committee, would engage in such discrimination."

Equal-protection violation

In its Jan. 29 ruling, the Standing Committee also cited WND's ties to the nonprofit Western Journalism Center as a basis for barring the newssite from the gallery.

WND in 1999 was spun off from WJC as a for-profit company, incorporated in Delaware. WJC still owns a minority stake in WND, but all other finances, as well as management and operations, are separate.

(The WJC, it should be noted, topped a Clinton White House enemies list, and was accused of being part of the so-called "vast right-wing conspiracy," for investigating the Vince Foster case and other Clinton administration scandals.)

But Ackerman argues that WND is being held to a different standard than other applicants who got credentials.

"The admissions standards were not equally applied to them as compared to other members of the press galleries," he said. "Indeed, there are existing members who clearly violate press gallery Rule 4 (which says applicants must be for-profits not engaged in lobbying), as presently interpreted by the Standing Committee – and who are much less qualified for admission, by such standards, than WorldNetDaily."

Ackerman cites among those existing press gallery
members: the Christian Science Monitor (ostensibly
controlled by a religious entity), Associated Press,
Boston University News Service, Medill News Service
(all nonprofits), and the Vietnam News Agency, Beijing
Daily, Xinhua and Egypt's Al-Ahram (all controlled by
totalitarian or other governments).

He added: "The committee has never explained this disparity."

"The disparity between applicants creates the clear impression that the Standing Committee is interpreting Rule 4 in such a way as to deny WorldNetDaily credentials only because of its perceived political bent," Ackerman said.

Indeed, despite already providing a raft of financial documents to the committee, the WJC and WND are now being asked by the committee to turn over even more documents – including financial information that is not public. Ackerman says the committee is on a "fishing expedition" and has no intention of approving WND.

Further, the rules for gallery eligibility "say nothing about outside ownership, nor any restriction because of the status of a shareholder or owner," Ackerman said.

Using Rule 4 to disqualify WND "creates an impermissible prior restraint on the ability of WorldNetDaily to effectively and equally report on legislative matters," he said. "Such restrictions have been held to be violative of the First Amendment (New York Times v. United States, 1971)."

Due-process violations

Ackerman argues that the Standing Committee has failed to meet due-process requirements "on each and every front" in considering WND's application for accreditation.

The Supreme Court, he notes, has held that "the fundamental requirement of due process is the opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner."

Yet Ackerman said "the committee has no procedures in place for the events in this case, did not provide exculpatory evidence, refused to provide any documents whatsoever, had no formal protocols for the hearing herein, and never sought the instruction of the speaker or Sen. Dodd as required by law."

Also, members of the committee stripped WND's
Washington bureau chief (who was a member of the
Senate Press Gallery under a previous employer) of
even his temporary "day-pass" access to Congress over
an issue that had nothing to do with the stated appeal
issues. Moreover, they gave him no formal notification
of their Aug. 1 action – which was done in an
unannounced, closed meeting with no vote. Nor did they
give him opportunity to formally respond to their
concerns in an open hearing.

"It is obvious that the committee has little or no respect for due-process principles," Ackerman said.

Regarding committee documents denied WND, Ackerman says he will apply to the Senate Rules Committee for subpoenas to be issued on WND's behalf to get the information he needs to properly argue WND's case. He says he has put Standing Committee lawyer Wiggins "on notice not to destroy or alter any documents, including any notes or formal minutes of committee meetings."

Contacts:

Kennie Gill, Senate Rules Committee chief of staff

(202) 224-6352

Sheryl Cohen, Sen. Dodd's chief of staff

(202) 224-2823

Kyle Simmons, chief of staff for Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., ranking Republican on Rules Committee

(202) 224-2541

Tad Vandermeid, Speaker Hastert's legal counsel

(202) 225-0305

John Feehrey, Speaker Hastert's press secretary

(202) 225-0600

Previous stories:

Senate press police withhold public info

Press gallery backpedals from earlier WND stand

E-mails contradict press gallery claims

Senate press boss 'lies' to WND readers

Senate press cop breaks her silence

In secret meeting, press police yank WND day pass