Trump Denies Report He Wants the Briefing Room Turned Into a Pool, Says He 'May Move' the Press Corps
Trump's Oct. 24 post came four days after a New York Times report, a day after his former press secretary said on TV that he had been "flirting" with the idea, and 11 days after a judge ruled that his ban on three outlets was likely unconstitutional.
A denial that leaves a door open
On Saturday, Oct. 24, 2026, President Trump posted on Truth Social about a report that he wanted to turn the White House briefing room back into a swimming pool. He called it "Fake News" and said he had "NEVER even thought to do such a stupid thing"[2][6]. Then he added a line: "Although I may move the Fake News to a less obnoxious location, the old swimming pool will never be brought back"[2][6].
So he denied the pool and left open a move. Both parts of that post are true at once. No relocation has been announced, and the briefing room is still in use[1].
That gap is what the story turns on. The post is a denial, and it is also a hint.
Where the pool idea came from
The pool is real history. The briefing room sits on top of an indoor pool built for Franklin D. Roosevelt. Richard Nixon had it covered in 1970 to make space for the press[15][24].
The current story began Tuesday, Oct. 20, with a New York Times report. Reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan cited three sources. They said Trump urged then-press secretary Karoline Leavitt in August to move reporters out of the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room. He called it her "last legacy"[3][4]. Leavitt left the job on Aug. 27[3].
Other pieces of the record point the same way. In September, Trump posted images on Truth Social comparing the briefing room, labeled "Fake News," with a gold-trimmed pool labeled "FDR Pool"[3]. Communications director Steven Cheung told the Times: "All options remain on the table, and we will make an announcement when appropriate"[3].
Then on Friday, Oct. 23, Leavitt went on HBO's Bill Maher show. She said Trump had "been flirting with" restoring the pool[5]. She also said she didn't know whether he'd go through with it, and she described the old tile still under the floor[5]. Trump posted his denial the next day.
One caveat on sourcing: one search result described the proposal as coming from a book by Haberman and Swan. The article itself calls it a Times story, and that point is unresolved. The original Times piece was also read here only through secondary reporting.
A court fight in the background
The post didn't land in a vacuum. On Sept. 18, Trump barred CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House over what he called their "FAKE NEWS"[9]. The three outlets sued in federal court in Washington, D.C.[9]
On Oct. 13, Judge Timothy Kelly issued a preliminary injunction. Trump appointed Kelly in 2017[7][13]. A preliminary injunction is a temporary order. It keeps the outlets' access in place until the case ends. Kelly found the outlets likely to win on their First Amendment and due-process claims[7][8]. He wrote that Trump's own comments suggested the revocations were meant to change reporting on him[9].
The Justice Department has appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit[10][12]. So the outlets' passes are active today only because of a court order that is under appeal[7][10].
The White House case: a workplace, not a public square
The administration's argument starts with the building. The White House is the president's home and workplace. A reporter's "hard pass" is a permanent badge that lets them enter the grounds without being cleared each day. The administration calls it a privilege, not a constitutional right[11].
In court, the DOJ also cited national security and "standards of professionalism and decorum"[9][11]. It argues the 1977 ruling in Sherrill v. Knight was wrongly decided and should be overturned[12].
On space, the argument is simple. The government gives a private press corps free rooms inside the West Wing. That is a choice. Deciding where reporters work is like any employer deciding who gets which office. No president must host his critics in the building's prime space.
Trump-aligned critics of the national media go further. They say the press corps has become a privileged guild that treats a free West Wing office as a birthright. In their view, the pool story is the media inflating a passing joke into a scandal, and Trump's denial is the proof[2][17]. They also point to Maher's own comment that he didn't "give a s—" about the uproar over the White House ballroom. They cite it as a sign that criticism of the renovations is overblown[5].
The incentive here is plain. A president wants to control the setting and terms of press access, and to answer coverage he sees as unfair. Keeping options open also fits with other White House renovations going ahead[3][5].
The press case: location is access
The banned outlets and the White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA) make a different argument. The White House may set neutral rules for access. It may not choose which reporters get in based on what they write. Judge Kelly agreed this was likely "unlawful viewpoint discrimination"[8].
There is a legal mechanism behind this. The D.C. Circuit has treated parts of the White House grounds as a "nonpublic forum"[12]. In that kind of space, the government can limit who enters. But the rules must be reasonable and can't depend on a person's viewpoint. It can cap the number of seats. It can't hand seats only to friendly outlets. The outlets also have a due-process claim: reporters must get notice and a fair process before losing access[7].
That explains the DOJ's strategy. If the White House isn't a forum at all, the viewpoint limit may not apply. So the DOJ asks the appeals court to overturn Sherrill v. Knight[12]. The outlets want the opposite. Under the current rule, Trump's own "FAKE NEWS" statements count as evidence of a viewpoint-based motive[9].
WHCA President Jacqui Heinrich is a Fox News correspondent. She said the public's "right to an independent press depends on reporters being able to do their jobs without fear that challenging the president will cut off their access"[14]. The WHCA has also said that past efforts to reshape the briefing room were about "punishment, not elevation, of journalists"[23].
Why does location matter? Reporters inside the West Wing can see who comes and goes. They can ask questions in the moment. Space farther away weakens that. And for the three banned outlets, the appeal decides whether they can stay at the White House at all[10].
Why a room move is legally different
A relocation is legally simpler than a ban on outlets. The president controls the West Wing's layout. No law requires the press to have a room there. The briefing room exists because Nixon chose to build it[15][24]. But courts can still look at why a move is made[8].
The idea isn't new. Trump's team considered moving reporters out of the West Wing before his first term[22]. In April 2025, a judge ordered the White House to restore the Associated Press's access after it was cut off[21]. Each new step now gets judged against that history.
Critics say Kelly's finding about motive could be used against any later relocation. The administration disputes the ruling and is appealing. Either way, a move of the press corps would likely be watched for signs of the same motive.
Two readings of one post
Supporters of Trump read the post as a refutation of a false report. Supporters of the Times read his "may move" line as keeping the central claim alive. They see the denial as narrow: he rejects the pool, not the move[2]. Each side can point to the same post as backing its account.
Coverage split the same way. The Hill and Al Jazeera ran even-handed accounts that set the denial beside the relocation hint[1][2]. Right-leaning outlets mostly led with the denial and Trump's own words. The Washington Examiner used the mild verb "hints"[6]. Just the News wrote that he "won't" replace the room with a pool. It didn't mention Leavitt's "flirting" remark from the day before[17]. Sinclair-owned Fox17 put Trump's "stupid" in its headline[20].
Left-leaning outlets led with the Times scoop and the Leavitt remark. HuffPost called the idea "Outrageous Action" in its own voice[4]. Mediaite wrote that Trump "Claims" he "may" move the press, with scare quotes that signal doubt[19]. India's Free Press Journal used the Times's framing and put "Report" at the end of its headline[18].
One more point for readers. Many outlets covering this are parties to the dispute. Three are suing the White House, and all depend on press access. That gives them an interest in how the story is framed.
What happens next is open. No move has been announced, and Cheung's "all options" line stands. The D.C. Circuit's ruling on the forum question will shape how much freedom this and future presidents have over who gets in. Both sides treat that ruling as the larger stake beyond where the press room ends up[12].
Summary
On Saturday, Oct. 24, 2026, President Donald Trump denied a New York Times report that he wanted to turn the White House press briefing room back into a swimming pool[1][2]. On Truth Social he called the report "Fake News" and wrote that he had "NEVER even thought to do such a stupid thing." He also wrote: "Although I may move the Fake News to a less obnoxious location, the old swimming pool will never be brought back"[2][6].
The Times story ran Tuesday, Oct. 20. Reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan cited three sources. They said Trump urged then-press secretary Karoline Leavitt in August to move reporters out of the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room, and called it her "last legacy"[3][4]. Leavitt left the job on Aug. 27[3]. White House communications director Steven Cheung told the Times that "all options remain on the table"[3]. On Friday, Oct. 23, Leavitt told HBO's Bill Maher that Trump had "been flirting with" restoring the pool[5]. Trump posted his denial the next day.
The post comes during a court fight over press access. On Sept. 18, Trump barred CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House over what he called their "FAKE NEWS"[9]. On Oct. 13, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly ruled that the ban was likely illegal "viewpoint discrimination" under the First Amendment. He ordered access restored while the lawsuit continues[7][8]. The Justice Department has appealed[10].
The core dispute is about what access to the White House is. The administration argues it is a privilege the president controls in his own workplace[11]. The outlets and the White House Correspondents' Association argue that the government may not use that access to punish coverage it dislikes[8][14]. Whether moving the press corps would be routine housekeeping or a new form of pressure depends on which view a reader holds.
The Event
On Saturday, Oct. 24, 2026, Trump posted on Truth Social that a report about him replacing the briefing room with the old swimming pool was false. In the same post he said he "may move" the press corps to "a less obnoxious location"[1][2]. The post followed an Oct. 20 New York Times report that Trump had repeatedly pushed to move reporters out of the room[3]. It also followed former press secretary Karoline Leavitt's Oct. 23 remark on HBO that Trump had been "flirting" with the idea[5]. No relocation has been announced[1].
Undisputed Facts
- Trump posted on Truth Social on Oct. 24, 2026, that he would never bring back the old pool, and that he "may move the Fake News to a less obnoxious location"[1][2].
- The briefing room sits on top of an indoor pool built for Franklin D. Roosevelt. Richard Nixon had the pool covered in 1970 to make space for the press[15][24].
- In September, Trump posted images on Truth Social comparing the briefing room, labeled "Fake News," with a gold-trimmed pool labeled "FDR Pool"[3].
- White House communications director Steven Cheung told the Times: "All options remain on the table, and we will make an announcement when appropriate"[3].
- Trump barred CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House on Sept. 18, 2026. The three outlets sued in federal court in Washington, D.C.[9]
- On Oct. 13, Judge Timothy Kelly, whom Trump appointed in 2017, issued a preliminary injunction. It keeps the three outlets' access in place until the case ends[7][13].
- The Justice Department filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit[10][12].
The Pressure
Strip away the moralizing and blame. What structural realities persist regardless of which narrative wins?
- Physical control of the building
- The president controls the West Wing's layout. No law requires the press to have a room there. The briefing room exists because Nixon chose to build it in 1970[15][24]. So a move is legally simpler than a ban on outlets. But courts can still look at why it is being done[8].
- The legal line: forum and viewpoint
- Two ideas drive this case. First, the D.C. Circuit has treated parts of the White House grounds as a "nonpublic forum"[12]. In a nonpublic forum, the government can limit who enters, but only with reasonable rules that do not depend on a person's viewpoint. It can cap the number of seats. It cannot hand seats only to friendly outlets. Second, the outlets have a due-process claim: reporters must get notice and a fair process before losing access[7]. These rules explain the DOJ's strategy. If the White House is not a forum at all, the viewpoint limit may not apply. That is why it asks the appeals court to overturn Sherrill v. Knight[12]. The outlets care in the opposite direction. Under the current rule, Trump's own 'FAKE NEWS' statements count as evidence of viewpoint-based motive[9].
- A record of earlier fights
- In April 2025 a judge ordered the White House to restore the Associated Press's access after it was cut off[21]. The idea of moving reporters out of the West Wing is also not new. Trump's team considered it before his first term[22]. Each new step is now judged against that history.
Material realityToday, CNN, MS NOW and Politico reporters have active White House passes. That is because of a court order that is under appeal[7][10]. The briefing room is still in use, and no relocation or construction has been announced[1]. The old pool's tile is still under the floor, as Leavitt described[5]. The appeals court's ruling on the forum question will decide how much freedom this and future presidents have to choose which reporters get in. Both sides treat that ruling as the larger stake, beyond where the press room ends up[12].
Narrative as a weaponThe White House has made two moves that pull in different directions. It denies the most colorful part of the story, the pool. It also keeps the bigger change, a relocation, openly possible: "all options remain on the table," and "I may move the Fake News"[2][3]. Supporters read this as a denial of a false report. Critics read it as keeping options open. The New York Times and outlets that cover media issues stress the anonymous sourcing, the September meme and Leavitt's 'flirting' remark. They want readers to see the denial as narrow. The WHCA and the banned outlets fold the episode into a larger story of retaliation, and they point to Judge Kelly's ruling as an outside check[8][14]. Readers should note one more thing. Many outlets reporting this story are parties to the dispute. Three are suing the White House, and all depend on press access. That gives them an interest in how the story is framed.
How Each Side Sees It
Each major actor’s view — how it frames things, its underlying incentive, and how it’s materially affected. Tap a side to read it.
Frames it asTheir view is that the White House is the president's home and workplace, not a public square. A reporter's "hard pass" is a permanent security badge that lets them enter the grounds without being cleared each day. The administration calls that badge a privilege, not a constitutional right[11]. In court, the DOJ also cited national security and "standards of professionalism and decorum"[9][11]. It argues the 1977 ruling Sherrill v. Knight was wrongly decided and should be overturned[12]. On space, they say the government gives a private press corps free rooms inside the West Wing, and that is a choice. Deciding where reporters work is like any employer deciding who gets which office. They also say no president is required to host his critics in the building's prime space. Trump's own post says the pool will not come back[2].
WhyTo control the setting and the terms of press access. To answer coverage the president considers unfair. To keep options open on the building as other White House renovations go ahead[3][5].
Impact on themKelly's preliminary ruling relied on Trump's own statements as evidence that he meant to change the outlets' reporting[9]. Critics say that finding could be used against any later relocation. The administration is appealing and disputes it. Any move of the press corps would likely be watched for signs of the same motive. The appeal could reshape the law on press access, in either direction[12].
Frames it asTheir view is that the White House may set neutral rules for access. It may not pick which reporters get in based on what they write. Judge Kelly agreed that this was likely "unlawful viewpoint discrimination"[8]. WHCA President Jacqui Heinrich, a Fox News correspondent, said the public's "right to an independent press depends on reporters being able to do their jobs without fear that challenging the president will cut off their access"[14]. The WHCA has said that past efforts to reshape the briefing room were about "punishment, not elevation, of journalists"[23]. Being close to the president matters for news. Reporters inside the West Wing can see who comes and goes and can ask questions in the moment. Space farther away weakens that.
WhyTo keep their physical access and their legal win. To stop the White House from setting a precedent where reporters' location or credentials depend on their coverage[8][14].
Impact on themIf the press moves out of the West Wing, reporters would see less of the daily traffic in and out of the building. For the three banned outlets, the outcome of the appeal decides whether they can stay at the White House at all[10].
Frames it asThey say their report rests on three people familiar with the talks[3]. It also matches other evidence. Trump posted the "FDR Pool" meme in September. Cheung did not deny the idea and said "all options remain on the table." Leavitt said on TV that Trump had been "flirting" with it[3][5]. Their reading is that Trump's denial is narrow. He denies wanting the pool, but he says he may move the press[2].
WhyTo defend the accuracy of a contested scoop and to cover how the White House treats the press.
Impact on themTrump called the report "Fake News"[2]. Supporters of the Times read his statement that he "may move" the press corps as partly confirming the report's central claim. Supporters of Trump read his denial of the pool as refuting it. Each side can point to the post as backing its account.
Frames it asTheir view is that the White House press corps has become a privileged guild. They say it treats a free office in the West Wing as a birthright. Many Americans distrust these outlets, so they argue a president should not have to give his workspace to them. They see the pool story as the media inflating a passing joke into a scandal. Trump's denial is the proof, in their view[2][17]. They note that Bill Maher, a liberal comic, told Leavitt he did not "give a s—" about the uproar over the White House ballroom, which they cite as a sign of how much of the renovation criticism they consider overblown[5].
WhyTo weaken the standing of outlets they see as hostile, and to defend the president's authority over the building[17].
Impact on themIf a relocation happens, they can call it a win over legacy media. If the courts block the president, they can point to the ruling as judges overreaching.
Like this article?
The Bias Ledger average rating 4
The same story, as framed by outlets across the spectrum, ordered least to most biased. The bias score (1 = straight, 10 = heavily spun) is an AI assessment of that framing — click an outlet to see its track record. The tell is the word choice or omission that reveals the angle.
| Outlet | Vantage | Bias | How they frame it | The tell |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Hill | U.S. center | 2 | Donald Trump denies plans to replace press room with pool / Trump hints that White House press area may be moved to another location | Even-handed. It puts the denial and the relocation hint side by side, with context about the court case. |
| Al Jazeera | Qatari state-funded | 2 | Trump says he may move White House press corps to new location | Plain wire-style account. It puts the relocation first and the pool denial second. |
| Washington Examiner | U.S. right | 3 | Trump hints at White House press corps relocation | Mild verb ('hints'). It uses Trump's own wording and adds little about the court finding of retaliation. |
| Just the News | U.S. right | 4 | Trump says he might move White House press corps, won't replace briefing room with swimming pool | It treats the denial as settled fact ('won't'). It does not mention that his former press secretary said the day before that he had been 'flirting' with the idea. |
| Fox17 | U.S. right (Sinclair-owned local station) | 4 | 'Fake News': Trump denies plan to remove White House press room, calls suggestion 'stupid' | It leads with Trump's own insult as the headline quote, which amplifies his frame. The quotes are accurately attributed. |
| Mediaite | U.S. left-leaning media news | 5 | Trump Claims He 'May' Move Press to 'Less Obnoxious Location' | 'Claims' plus scare quotes around 'May' signal doubt about the president's statement. |
| Free Press Journal | Indian | 5 | Trump Wants To Remove Reporters From White House, Turn Press Briefing Room Into Swimming Pool: Report | It states the Times's claim as the main assertion and puts the attribution ('Report') at the end. |
| HuffPost | U.S. left | 7 | Trump Wanted Outrageous Action To Be Karoline Leavitt's 'Last Legacy': NYT | 'Outrageous' is the outlet's own judgment, not attributed to anyone. It reports the Times's anonymous-source account as established. |
References
- Trump says he may move White House press corps to new location — Al Jazeera · Qatari state-funded broadcaster
- Donald Trump denies plans to replace press room with pool — The Hill · U.S. center; Nexstar-owned Capitol Hill outlet
- Trump Floated Kicking Press Out of WH and Replacing Briefing Room With a Swimming Pool — NYT's Maggie Haberman Reports — Mediaite · U.S. media-politics site, left-leaning, founded by Dan Abrams
- Trump Wanted Outrageous Action To Be Karoline Leavitt's 'Last Legacy': NYT — HuffPost · U.S. left; owned by BuzzFeed Inc.
- Karoline Leavitt Confirms Trump Is 'Flirting' With the Idea of Turning Press Briefing Room Into a Pool — TheWrap · U.S. entertainment-industry trade outlet, center-left
- Trump hints at White House press corps relocation — Washington Examiner · U.S. right; owned by Clarity Media (Philip Anschutz)
- Judge deals another blow to Trump's White House media bans — The Washington Post · U.S. center-left; owned by Jeff Bezos
- CNN, MS NOW and Politico prevail against White House — for now — NPR · U.S. public broadcaster, center-left audience
- CNN, MS NOW and Politico allowed back into the White House after judge orders Trump admin to restore access — CNN · U.S. center-left; a plaintiff in the lawsuit
- Trump to appeal order blocking White House from banning MS NOW, CNN and Politico — CNBC · U.S. business news; owned by Versant (Comcast spinoff), corporate sibling of plaintiff MS NOW
- DOJ petitions judge to reinstate White House media ban — Washington Examiner · U.S. right; owned by Clarity Media (Philip Anschutz)
- DOJ Appeals Ruling Restoring CNN, MS NOW, Politico Access — Briefs · Small news-summary aggregator; orientation unclear
- Timothy J. Kelly — Wikipedia · Crowd-edited reference
- WHCA Decries White House "Retaliation" After Trump Berates Reporter — Deadline · U.S. entertainment-industry trade outlet (Penske Media)
- Trump floats reverting White House press room to swimming pool: Report — Washington Examiner · U.S. right; owned by Clarity Media (Philip Anschutz)
- Trump floats booting White House press from briefing room — The Washington Times · U.S. right; owned by Operations Holdings (Unification Church-linked)
- Trump says he might move White House press corps, won't replace briefing room with swimming pool — Just the News · U.S. right; founded by John Solomon
- Trump Wants To Remove Reporters From White House, Turn Press Briefing Room Into Swimming Pool: Report — Free Press Journal · Indian English-language daily, Mumbai
- Trump Claims He 'May' Move Press to 'Less Obnoxious Location' — Mediaite · U.S. media-politics site, left-leaning, founded by Dan Abrams
- 'Fake News': Trump denies plan to remove White House press room, calls suggestion 'stupid' — Fox17 (Sinclair Broadcast Group) · Sinclair-owned local station; Sinclair is right-leaning
- Judge orders White House to restore media access to US news agency — Al Jazeera · Qatari state-funded broadcaster
- Trump weighs moving White House press corps out of building — CBS News · U.S. center; owned by Paramount Skydance
- Correspondents' Association pushes back on rumors of White House briefing room shake-up — Yahoo News · U.S. news aggregator/originator, center
- James S. Brady Press Briefing Room — Wikipedia · Crowd-edited reference