The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit just signaled it might side with the White House in a battle over who gets to roam the hallowed halls of power, as Newsmax reports.

This clash pits the White House against The Associated Press (AP), centering on restricted access to key presidential spaces like the Oval Office and Air Force One after the AP balked at adopting the term "Gulf of America."

It all kicked off in January when President Donald Trump issued an executive order mandating federal agencies to use "Gulf of America" instead of the traditional "Gulf of Mexico."

White House Clamps Down on Access

Not long after, the AP, sticking to its editorial independence, refused to update its Stylebook with the new terminology.

By February, the news organization found itself locked out of select White House areas and filed a lawsuit against three senior officials, claiming the restrictions violated First Amendment free speech protections.

The administration didn’t budge, arguing they have the right to choose which journalists get access, without regard to editorial viewpoints.

Legal Battles Heat Up

In June, a divided three-judge panel allowed the White House to keep its limits on AP access, a decision later upheld by the full appeals court.

A district judge, Trevor McFadden, initially ordered the administration to restore the AP’s access to press pool areas, but the appeals court hit pause on that ruling while the case unfolds.

Since that pause, AP photographers have trickled back into in-town and travel pools, and some reporters have snagged occasional pool assignments, though full access remains elusive.

Judges Lean Toward Administration’s Side

On Monday, a three-judge panel, including Trump-appointed Judges Neomi Rao and Gregory Katsas, seemed ready to back the White House’s authority to limit access to certain presidential zones.

The administration pressed the court to overturn McFadden’s earlier decision, insisting that selective access isn’t tied to a journalist’s perspective. Talk about a tight guest list -- guess not everyone gets an invite to the Oval Office party.

“Ultimately, the question is, when the president invites reporters into the Oval Office, is he creating a First Amendment forum? I think the answer to that is clearly not,” said Justice Department attorney Yaakov Roth. Well, that’s one way to shut the door on press freedoms -- call it an exclusive club and move on.

AP Fights for Press Freedom

On the flip side, the AP’s legal team pushed back hard. “Just like the president is not above the law, the Oval Office is not a First Amendment-banned forum for the purposes of conducting the government's business,” argued Charles Tobin, representing the AP. That’s a bold swing, but does it land with a court leaning toward executive control?

The AP expressed disappointment with the ongoing restrictions, stressing that both the press and public deserve to speak without fear of government pushback.

It’s a noble stand, though in a world where access is power, noble doesn’t always win. Still, credit to the AP for not bowing to pressure on its own editorial standards.