The White House on Wednesday responded to CNN’s lawsuit over reporter Jim Acosta’s suspended press pass with a 28-page filing arguing, among other things, that the White House has broad discretion over reporters’ access.

“[T]he decision to provide a journalist a White House hard pass takes place at the intersection of two realms the First Amendment does not reach: access to the White House, and White House interactions with particular journalists,” Justice Department lawyers wrote in a filing Wednesday. “And where, as here, the White House has determined that it wants to scale back its interactions with a particular journalist, denying that journalist a hard pass is a permissible way to accomplish that goal.”

CNN has argued that the White House unconstitutionally suspended Acosta’s access based on his questions and Trump’s dislike of him and CNN, contrary to the First Amendment, and that Acosta was denied prior notice and an opportunity to respond to the revocation. CNN also argued that the process of revoking Acosta’s pass violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

Numerous media outlets including Fox News have said they intend to file amicus briefs in support of CNN.

The Trump administration argued that Acosta didn’t have any right in the first place to a press pass because the White House doesn’t consider Acosta an “otherwise eligible journalist” — that is, a journalist who otherwise doesn’t pose any physical threat.

“Unlike the situation in Sherrill [v. Knight], where only the Secret Service was objecting to the issuance of a pass to the reporter, the White House Press Office here has so objected and thus does not ‘recognize the right of a journalist to a White House press pass’ in all cases absent a demonstrated security threat,” the filing read.

But even still, the administration argued, Acosta’s performance at the Nov. 7 press conference — the same one of which White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders released a doctored video exaggerating Acosta’s movements — was reason enough for his suspension.

“The stated rationale for the revocation of Mr. Acosta’s pass—that he was disrupting press proceedings—is evident from the video he has proffered, is entirely viewpoint- and content-neutral, and clears this limited bar [prohibiting arbitrary and less than compelling reasons],” the administration argued.

The filing added later: “Revoking a reporter’s hard pass for impeding the White House’s ability to conduct fair and orderly press conferences is not ‘arbitrary.’”

Read the Trump administration’s filing below:

