Washington state lawmakers can continue to bar three conservative media figures from parts of the Capitol that are off-limits to the general public, a federal judge ruled Tuesday as the case underscored a broader fight over who counts as a journalist.
The dispute began earlier this year when the Democratic-controlled Washington House of Representatives declined to issue press credentials that would have allowed Ari Hoffman, Brandi Kruse and Jonathan Choe access to areas of the Capitol reserved for credentialed members of the press. The House said the applicants were not “bona fide journalists” because they are participants in political life—advocating for certain agendas and hosting or speaking at rallies, according to the complaint described in court.
After the House denied their requests, the three went to federal court seeking an emergency temporary restraining order in the closing days of the legislative session. Their lawyer, Jackson Maynard, told U.S. District Judge David Estudillo on Monday that the process used to deny them passes was vague and arbitrarily applied, violating their due-process rights, and that withholding access because they hold political views violates protections for free speech and a free press.
Maynard argued that time was short and emphasized the role he described for his clients. “In the remaining 72 hours of the legislative session, the House will potentially be wrestling with a multibillion-dollar budget and other legislation of great importance,” Maynard told the judge Monday, adding, “My clients are the eyes and ears of the people in the legislative process. Their voices and opinions should not be excluded.”
In his order, Estudillo said the plaintiffs did not show that they were denied passes because of political affiliation—something he said would trigger First Amendment concerns—and did not show that the denial was likely to be arbitrary in a way that would violate due process. The judge acknowledged that “both parties have legitimate interests at stake here,” but found the emergency order unwarranted because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success.
The House’s defense, delivered through its attorney Jessica Goldman, centered on the House’s credentialing criteria and what it characterized as a distinction between journalism and political activity. Goldman said the group was not denied passes because of viewpoint but because they were activists for political causes rather than independent monitors.
Goldman told the judge that the plaintiffs were not merely attending events in the role of reporting. “It’s also important to understand that the plaintiffs here were not just attending an event, which obviously journalists do all the time,” Goldman said. “They were the leaders of these events that they attended. They were their keynote speakers. They have attached their names and their fame and notoriety to trying to get these … laws passed by the legislature.”
The case described examples of what the House characterized as political engagement by the applicants. In addition to hosting a conservative talk radio show, the court filing and reporting said Hoffman is also involved with a political action committee called Let’s Go Washington, and Kruse is involved in that same group as well as Future 42, where she criticizes Democratic policymakers and advocates for or against proposed bills. Choe sought access as a representative tied to Discovery Institute and Turning Point USA, with the filing describing Discovery as a think tank and stating that Turning Point USA says its mission is to identify, educate, train and organize students to promote principles including fiscal responsibility, free markets and limited government.
At the center of the legal arguments is how legislatures set standards for credentials in an era when non-traditional media outlets—like podcasters and other user-generated content producers—seek access. Goldman pointed to that shift, saying it left legislatures grappling with how to define who belongs on credentialed press lists.
The broader background cited in the court dispute includes how other states have changed their rules for legislative floor access amid similar challenges. The story referenced Utah, where journalist Bryan Schott said he had covered the Utah Legislature with a press pass for years before being denied a credential after he founded the news website Utah Political Watch; and Iowa, where Republican lawmakers changed a policy in 2022 about who could be on the Senate floor, arguing they could not determine who should get media credentials amid newer media outlets.
The Washington State Capitol Correspondents Association’s guidelines, as described in the case, require that the applicant be “a bona fide journalist” and that there be a line “between professional journalism and political or policy work.” The association shifted credentialing to the Legislature after the three threatened a lawsuit in 2025, the reporting said, with the Senate issuing passes at the time while the House took over and denied the applications again.
Maynard said the plaintiffs were not giving up. “We will continue to litigate this case until we either prevail or exercise every viable legal option,” he said in an email, adding that their goal was to obtain the access they argue the constitution guarantees for members of the press.
Correction: This story has been updated to correct the name of the show hosted by Hoffman, “The Ari Hoffman Show,” not “Seattle’s Conservative Talk.” It also removed a reference to Kruse lobbying on certain issues; the reporting said she advocates but is not a registered lobbyist.