NewsGuild-CWA, ACLU defend press freedom in federal court

“The government cannot properly silence the People or the Press simply because the government disagrees,” ruled the court

SAN FRANCISCO, CA (April 10, 2026) — In late March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that union journalists, protestors, legal observers were likely to succeed on their First Amendment claims brought forth in a lawsuit filed against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for retaliatory use of force during protests against federal immigration actions in Southern California.

“We applaud the decision by the Ninth Circuit in affirming everyone’s right to a free press and the right to peacefully protest,” said NewsGuild-CWA President Jon Schleuss. “Federal agents attacked journalists, peaceful protesters and legal observers and the union of journalists will not let that stand. We’re proud to stand with the ACLU, the Los Angeles Press Club and our own members in this lawsuit to protect the First Amendment rights of everyone on American soil.”

Photo: NewsGuild-CWA

NewsGuild-CWA joined the lawsuit filed by the ACLU in June of 2025, arguing that retaliatory force by federal agents curtailed constitutionally protected freedoms.

“In light of the First Amendment to our Constitution, the government cannot properly silence the People or the Press simply because the government disagrees with public protests, demonstrations, press reporting, or other speech criticizing the government,” wrote U.S. Circuit Court Judge Ronald M. Gould in the opinion.

In a news release, NewsGuild-CWA celebrated the court’s finding:

“Today’s ruling confirms that the Constitution does not permit the government to silence dissent through intimidation or violence,” said Peter Eliasberg, chief counsel at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. “The court recognized the harms inflicted on journalists, observers and protesters are real, ongoing and unconstitutional. We will continue to fight to ensure that those protections are not just recognized but enforced.”

While the Ninth Circuit directed the district court to narrow the scope of the preliminary injunction issued last September, it upheld the core findings that plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their retaliation claims and that immediate relief is warranted.

“This ruling is an important step towards accountability,” said Lexis-Olivier Ray, a plaintiff in the case. “Nobody should face violence or retaliation for documenting federal agents or speaking out, especially against government abuse.”

“This decision reinforces that in a democracy, the public has the right to document and observe government action and to speak out without being targeted for doing so,” said Matt Borden, partner with BraunHagey & Borden LLP, representing the plaintiffs. “Shooting projectiles at reporters, targeting observers and injuring demonstrators is not crowd control. It’s retaliation.”

The full text of the ruling is available on the NewsGuild-CWA website.