Last week, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced that the Trump White House “will determine” which news outlets have the ability to cover the president and the ins-and-outs of the administration.

The announcement came after the Trump government faced a lawsuit from The Associated Press after the wire service was arbitrarily denied access due to its refusal to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, a Trump administration initiative to rename the body of water whose name predates the United States of America by more than 200 years.

According to the AP, Leavitt said that “The changes would rotate traditional outlets from the group and include some streaming services.

Leavitt cast the change as a modernization of the press pool, saying the move would be more inclusive and restore ‘access back to the American people’ who elected Trump. But media experts said the move raised troubling First Amendment issues because the president is choosing who covers him.”

Whether you voted for Trump or not, this decision should raise an alarm and put the current administration’s commitment to the First Amendment under a microscope.

This concept is not a one party issue, as President Barack Obama never denied right wing leaning news organizations like Fox News the ability to cover what’s going on with the White House, nor did George W. Bush deny MSNBC.

Whether you think coverage of Trump is fair or unfair, the concept of a free press is fundemental to the American way and curtailing that freedom creates a slippery slope to a state run media full of propaganda like is seen in North Korea.

If you think that the media’s treatment of Trump is unfair, you are entitled to that opinion but what would you think if the next person to occupy the White House comes along and does something similar?

This precedent should be of serious concern to anyone that believes in the First Amendment and freedom of speech.

(THE MARQUETTE MINING JOURNAL)