Karoline Leavitt Lawsuit: The AP Case and The View Hoax

The only real lawsuit involving Karoline Leavitt is Associated Press v. Budowich, in which the AP sued Leavitt and two other senior White House officials over being barred from the Oval Office, Air Force One, and other limited-access press spaces. Leavitt is a defendant, not a plaintiff. The widely circulated claim that she sued The View for $800 million and won is fabricated; it originated on YouTube channels that produce fictional stories about public figures.

The Associated Press Case Against Leavitt

The AP filed suit on February 21, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The case is Associated Press v. Budowich, No. 1:25-cv-00532. The three named defendants are Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich, Chief of Staff Susan Wiles, and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt. The complaint alleges violations of the First and Fifth Amendments.¹²

What Started It

On January 20, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America.” The AP, whose stylebook is used by newsrooms worldwide, announced it would continue to use “Gulf of Mexico” to serve its global readership. On February 11, White House officials told the AP its reporters would lose access to the Oval Office, Air Force One, and other limited-space events unless the organization adopted the administration’s preferred name.³

Budowich announced the ban on X on February 14, calling the AP’s editorial stance “divisive” and a “commitment to misinformation.” AP reporters would keep their general White House credentials but were barred indefinitely from limited-access spaces. In an email to AP executive editor Julie Pace that was later attached to the lawsuit, Wiles wrote that being in those spaces is “a privilege” and said the AP Stylebook “should also appropriately make the distinction as an American guideline.”³⁴

Leavitt addressed the suit at CPAC on February 24, saying she had just learned she had been sued. “We’ll see them in court,” she said. “We feel we are in the right in this position.”⁵ White House communications director Steven Cheung separately called the suit “frivolous and demented” and a “PR stunt.”⁶

How the Courts Have Ruled

On February 24, 2025, Judge Trevor McFadden denied the AP’s request for an emergency restraining order but signaled where he was leaning, saying from the bench that the White House’s actions appeared to be “pretty clearly viewpoint discrimination” and that existing case law was “uniformly unhelpful to the White House.”⁷

On April 8, 2025, Judge McFadden granted a preliminary injunction. He held that excluding the AP amounted to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, writing that “under the First Amendment, if the Government opens its doors to some journalists, it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints.” The order required the White House to treat the AP on “an equal playing field as similarly situated outlets,” without granting it special or permanent access. McFadden delayed implementation by one week so the administration could appeal.⁸

The administration appealed the next day. On June 6, 2025, a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel stayed the injunction, pausing the AP’s court-ordered reinstatement. The AP sought rehearing en banc, and on July 22 the full circuit denied that petition in a per curiam order. Circuit Judge Justin Walker filed a concurrence, joined in part by Circuit Judge Patricia Millett.⁹⁷

Oral argument before a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel took place on November 24, 2025. AP attorney Charles Tobin told the court that “the First Amendment does not stop at the Oval Office door.” The administration’s lawyer, Yaakov Roth, argued that the president has discretion over who gets into limited spaces, comparing pool selection to inviting guests to a social event. Judges Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao raised practical concerns about court enforcement of access rules, while Judge Robert Wilkins asked whether the government’s position would let it bar citizens from White House tours based on their social media history.¹⁰

Where Things Stand

As of mid-2026, the D.C. Circuit has not issued a ruling after the November 2025 argument. The case remains active, with the most recent docket entry listed as December 15, 2025.⁹¹¹¹²

The Constitutional Question

The central issue is whether the White House can exclude a credentialed news organization from the press pool because it disagrees with that organization’s editorial choices. The closest prior ruling is Sherrill v. Knight, a 1977 D.C. Circuit decision holding that once the government opens press facilities to journalists, access cannot be denied “arbitrarily or for less than compelling reasons,” and that any denial must include notice, an opportunity to respond, and a written explanation.¹³

Sherrill dealt with credentials and Secret Service screening. The AP already holds credentials and is not accused of any security concern. The dispute is about viewpoint: whether the White House can punish an outlet for refusing to adopt the administration’s preferred terminology. Brian Hauss of the ACLU argued in an amicus brief that permitting such retaliation would leave the public hearing only from “sycophants and stenographers.”¹¹ The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press called the exclusion “especially invidious” discrimination.⁷

The Fake “$800 Million Lawsuit Against The View”

No such lawsuit exists. Beginning in early 2025, YouTube channels including “Agenda Insight” and “MagnetTV GENIUS DATA” posted videos claiming Leavitt had filed and won an $800 million lawsuit against The View. One April 1, 2025 video was titled “The View BEGS Karoline Leavitt To STOP Her $800 MILLION Lawsuit,” and another on April 19 declared she had “FINALLY” won. The clips combined real footage of Leavitt and the show’s hosts with fabricated voiceover.¹⁴

Snopes rated the claim False on May 1, 2025, noting that no court record or legitimate news report shows any such case and that a judgment of that size would have drawn massive coverage.¹⁴ A related hoax debunked by Lead Stories in February 2025 falsely claimed Leavitt had “kicked Whoopi Goldberg off The View.” That video came from a channel called “Celeb Scoop,” which Lead Stories identified as a producer of AI-generated clickbait; an AI-detection tool found its text was roughly 60 percent likely to be AI-generated, and its audio had flat, synthetic speech patterns.¹⁵

These stories fit a broader pattern. Snopes has documented a network of social media posts and ad-heavy blogs manufacturing celebrity lawsuit narratives to draw advertising revenue. One late-2025 story claimed singer Joan Baez had sued Leavitt for $50 million over an “ambush” on The Tonight Show. Neither had appeared on the program, and the accompanying images showed signs of AI generation. Snopes found nearly identical templates recycled to invent lawsuits involving Travis Kelce, Barbra Streisand, and others.¹⁶

1
CourtListener. Associated Press v. Budowich, Docket
2
CBS News. Associated Press Sues Trump Officials Over Coverage Restrictions
3
CNN. White House Confirms Indefinite Ban on AP Reporters From Oval Office and Air Force One
4
PBS NewsHour. Judge Won’t Immediately Restore Associated Press Access to White House
5
Rev. Karoline Leavitt Speaks at CPAC
6
Politico. Associated Press Lawsuit Against Trump Officials
7
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Associated Press v. Budowich
8
CNN. Judge Restores Associated Press Access to White House
9
CourtListener. Associated Press v. Taylor Budowich, DC Circuit Docket
10
First Amendment Encyclopedia. AP, Trump Administration Argue Press Access Case Before Federal Appeals Court
11
ACLU. ACLU to Federal Appeals Court: White House Retaliation Against Disfavored Reporters Puts U.S. in Dangerous Company
12
ACLU of D.C. Associated Press v. Budowich
13
Justia. Sherrill v. Knight, 569 F.2d 124
14
Snopes. Fact Check: Karoline Leavitt $800M Lawsuit Against The View
15
Lead Stories. Fact Check: Leavitt Did Not Kick Goldberg Off The View
16
Snopes. Fact Check: Joan Baez $50M Lawsuit Against Karoline Leavitt