(The Center Square) – A week after a federal judge ruled against three journalists who were denied press credentials to cover the 2026 legislative session in Olympia, questions remain over the groups behind the legal effort to limit media access, including that The Spokesman-Review helped pay an attorney who argued against the journalists getting credentials.
Ari Hoffman, host of “The Ari Hoffman Show” on Seattle talk radio station KVI-AM; Brandi Kruse, who hosts the “unDivided” podcast and Jonathan Choe, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, were denied press credentials by the Democratic-controlled Washington House of Representatives.
Those credentials provide access to parts of the Capitol in Olympia that are off-limits to the general public including the wings of the state House and Senate.
The three journalists, represented by Citizen Action Defense Fund Executive Director Jackson Maynard, asked the court for an emergency temporary restraining order in hopes of gaining passes in the final days of the session.
“The process used to award press passes by the defendants clearly violates the federal and state constitutional protections, freedom of the press, and due process,” said CADF Executive Director Jackson Maynard in the Mar 9 hearing. “My clients are the eyes and ears of the people in the legislative process. Their voices and opinions should not be excluded.”
Jessica Goldman, an attorney with Summit Law Group, argued for the defense that the plaintiffs are “opinion” journalists who are not entitled to credentials.
She told the judge that because all three have shown up at rallies and other political events for conservative issues and legislation, they are not independent journalists.
“The plaintiffs here are not just attending an event, which journalists do all the time,” Goldman argued. “These plaintiffs did way more than that, they were the leaders of these events. They were the keynote speakers … they have attached their fame and notoriety to trying to get these legislative … these laws passed by the Legislature.”
The judge ruled against the plaintiffs finding they failed to show that they were denied passes because of their political affiliations.
In coverage of the hearing, The Spokesman-Review reported that their publication was involved in efforts to oppose the plaintiffs hoping to gain press credentials.
The Spokesman noted the Capitol Correspondents Association is made up of reporters from publications around the state, who up until last year advised who got credentials to access press areas.
As reported by The Center Square, the CCA relinquished that role after being pressed during the 2025 legislative session about denial of press credentials to certain journalists.
“A Spokesman-Review reporter is a member of the Capitol Correspondents Association, and the newspaper has financially contributed to enlist the services of attorney Kathy George, representing the law firm pushing to keep certain journalists from accessing credentials,” noted a March 10 Spokesman Review article.
“Per its guidelines, the association doesn’t support credentialing those who work for a publication that is part of a larger, non-news organization,” the article said. Also, it “will not support the providing of a credential to a person who is or may become engaged in campaigns, lobbying or the development of public policy.”
The Center Square emailed The Spokesman-Review to ask about the paper funding the legal team that fought against the independent journalist’s effort to obtain credentials.
“Our reporters and editors are not allowed to involve themselves in political activities, including participating in rallies, giving campaign contributions and displaying publicity for candidates,” wrote Managing Editor Lindsey Treffrey. “If a reporter is at a political event, they should be there only as a journalist to help inform our readers.”
The Center Square sent a follow-up question to Treffrey inquiring further into why the publication was funding the legal bills in opposition to press access. The Center Square did not receive a specific response, but were directed to the legal filings that said: “There is no constitutional basis to force CCA to endorse press credentials contrary to its own guidelines. Those guidelines are reasonably designed to distinguish professional journalists from those engaged in advocacy, so as not to jeopardize the Capitol press corps’ longstanding access to a non-public space in the House chambers.”
Maynard told The Center Square it was “good” that the publication disclosed they are helping to fund the effort to deny press access, but said it appears to be a pretty obvious “conflict of interest.”
“I thought it was good that they disclosed that conflict that they were fundraising for the opposition case, but I think it just goes to show that there can be conflicts of interest and yet reporters are still able to do their jobs,” he said. “And whatever conflicts are present for my clients shouldn’t matter.”
CADF has not yet decided if they will appeal the decision.
