Three news organizations blocked from the White House by President Donald Trump are asking a federal judge to prevent the administration from enforcing the ban while their lawsuit proceeds, arguing that officials have continued to apply restrictions inconsistently despite a court order restoring access. CNN, MS NOW and Politico filed the request Monday in federal court. Their lawyers say the ban, which began Sept. 19, violates the First Amendment and due process and was imposed to punish coverage the administration dislikes. The outlets’ filing asks for a preliminary injunction that would keep their White House access in place until the case is resolved. A two-week temporary restraining order issued last week by U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly restored the organizations’ access, but is set to expire Oct. 8. Kelly wrote that he was skeptical the administration’s national-security rationale was its actual reason for removing the outlets. The filing argues that the White House has continued to apply the restrictions unpredictably, including by excluding CNN from its assigned role in the broadcast pool on Sept. 26. The pool rotates coverage among CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox News so one network can report on events and share its coverage with the others. After CNN was removed from the rotation, the other networks suspended pool coverage in solidarity. CNN was later allowed to cover Trump with Chinese leader Xi Jinping at the National Archives, but the White House barred the network from Air Force One on Sept. 27, when the president traveled to a college football game in Tennessee. The other networks did not provide a replacement, leaving no primary television pool reporter on the trip, the filing says. The administration maintains that White House access is a privilege, not a right. Attorney General Todd Blanche said Sunday that the president can decide who flies on Air Force One and criticized outlets he accused of failing to report accurate news. He also described what he called misinformation as a national-security concern. CNN’s lawyer, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., called the ban retaliation and viewpoint discrimination. The administration’s actions, he said, show it could restore a complete ban if the court allows it. The dispute is part of a wider conflict between the Trump administration and news organizations, with separate restrictions on reporters covering the White House and Pentagon and multiple cases moving through federal courts. The stakes extend beyond the organizations in the lawsuit: limits on press access can reduce the public’s ability to scrutinize the president and his administration, while newsrooms face difficult choices about whether to accept restricted access or refuse coverage in solidarity. David A. Schulz, who directs Yale Law School’s Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic, said networks could respond to continued exclusions by withholding pool coverage, but that there are few easy options. RonNell Andersen Jones, a law professor at the University of Utah, said both accepting the restrictions and declining to cover major government events could carry costs for press freedom and public information.