WASHINGTON D.C. — U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman halted enforcement of key aspects of the Pentagon's new press policy during a hearing Monday in Washington, calling parts of the policy "weird" and "Kafkaesque." The judge stopped short of ruling on a motion filed by a news organization to force compliance with his March 20 decision that struck down aspects of a previously implemented Pentagon media policy.

The Pentagon implemented the new press policy last week following revamped press restrictions announced last fall. Seven reporters, along with dozens of other news organizations, chose not to sign the new restrictions and returned their long-held press passes, leading a news organization to sue the Trump administration over the policy.

The judge expressed alarm that journalists could be penalized for asking questions of military officials, which he said they had the right to do, and that a Pentagon employee could simply decline to answer. "That hardly seems consistent with right of access and the first amendment," Friedman said during the hearing.

The new policy states that by offering anonymity to a Pentagon employee, a journalist demonstrates knowledge that the employee was not authorized to disclose the information, thereby putting their press pass at risk. "Aren't there lots of reasons why people in government ask for anonymity? People ask for anonymity because they're afraid of retribution or because their bosses won't like it," Friedman said.

Timothy Parlatore, a Pentagon official who played a central role in designing the revamped press restrictions, defended the policy after the hearing. "What we're talking about here are when they go to department employees and they say: 'Hey, can you tell me about this?' And the employee's like: 'No, I don't want to talk to you.' And they say: 'Well, what if I give you anonymity? Will you talk to me then?' Then they're trying to get somebody to talk who's already said that they don't want to talk," Parlatore said. Parlatore claimed that the policy had already paid dividends in a decrease of leaked classified information.

Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., a lawyer representing the news organization, criticized the administration's response to the court order. "Nothing will stop them. Not a court order. Not an injunction," Boutrous said. "They've made the press credentials that we fought so hard to get back a meaningless piece of plastic."

At the end of the hearing, the judge asked government lawyer Sarah Welch to submit by the end of the day a brief explaining the case law basis for creating a new press policy in response to a court order striking down the crux of the previous policy. Friedman had previously ruled that seven reporters should have their press access badges returned.