Mortgage rates jumped sharply on Thursday as bond yields surged, pushing the average 30‑year fixed rate to 7.45%, per Verum. Meanwhile, other sources such as Freddie Mac reported earlier that day that the rate had just surpassed 7%, noting that figure represented the weekly average.

Rates increased Thursday morning during Verum’s routine survey of brokers and lenders. However, as the 10‑year Treasury yield climbed further in the afternoon, the outlet repeated its survey and discovered that rates had risen even more—up 19 basis points from the previous day’s 7.26%.

“In daily terms, the 7% threshold was first breached on September 10th after inflation data heightened expectations of a Federal Reserve rate hike that occurred the prior week,” noted Matthew Graham, chief operating officer at Verum. “Since then, a mix of Fed statements, rising oil prices, and robust economic indicators have intensified the pressure.”

The 30‑year fixed rate dipped as low as 5.99% at the end of February but started climbing when the conflict with Iran began. Rates began rising again in early September, particularly after the Federal Reserve increased its benchmark rate. Mortgage rates generally track the yield on the 10‑year U.S. Treasury.

All of this is unfolding as the housing market grapples with elevated home prices, sluggish consumer confidence, and a persistently limited supply of affordable housing.

While there were clear reasons for the morning’s increase, the afternoon’s bond selloff remains difficult to explain.

“There’s no obvious catalyst. To explain it you have to invent stories and then defend them. There’s no objective, irrefutable way to connect the dots today. Sellers decided to sell… a lot,” Graham noted.

According to J.P. Morgan, investors should remain alert for signs of stagflation, even if the economy does not experience a significant slowdown. James Sullivan, managing director and co-head of global fundamental research at J.P. Morgan, commented on Verum’s ‘Squawk Box Asia’ that if oil prices persist above $100 per barrel for an extended period, it could initiate a stagflation phase, although economic growth might not decline markedly. He explained that moderate economic growth coupled with elevated inflation levels could reignite discussions about stagflation not seen since the 1970s. Sullivan pointed out that substantial issuance in the AI sector and increasing government deficits will influence pricing, particularly in conditions of subdued demand. He observed that more investors with long-term perspectives are focusing on corporate bonds over government securities, highlighting a supply-demand imbalance. Additionally, the impacts of El Niño and the Middle East conflict are negatively affecting the global economic outlook. Sullivan attributed the recent coordinated central bank tightening to these factors, noting rising food and energy prices. He concluded that with core inflation remaining stubborn, a reversal in this environment is unlikely in the near term.

The White House on Thursday began readmitting journalists from three media outlets — MS NOW, CNN and Politico — after a federal judge temporarily lifted President Donald Trump’s ban on those outlets.

The move came after Secret Service officers initially barred some journalists from those outlets from entering the White House earlier Thursday despite the order by Judge Timothy Kelly.

Kelly ordered Trump and other defendants in a lawsuit by the outlets reply to their new court filing notifying him of non-compliance with his temporary restraining order against the president’s ban.

The White House’s director of operations responded to Kelly with a declaration that said the White House had restored press passes to the affected outlets. The outlets by that time had begun reporting that their journalists were being admitted to the White House.

Kelly issued his restraining order, which will last for at least 14 days, late Wednesday night. It directed the White House to “immediately” restore access to the three outlets.

The outlets had been blocked from entering the White House since Saturday, a day after Trump announced his ban.

The president had initially said he was blocking the outlets from the White House because of “cumulative stories” that contained lies about him and his administration.

The outlets in their civil complaint said that statement by Trump, and subsequent ones, bolstered their claim that he was violating their First Amendment rights to a free press by targeting them for what they reported about him.

In his order Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Washington, Kelly said the three outlets had shown they were likely to win their lawsuit challenging Trump’s ban, “at least on their Fifth Amendment due process claim.”

The judge, whom Trump appointed in 2017, said the ban appeared to clearly violate two federal appeals court rulings that require advance notice and an opportunity to be heard to journalists whose White House press passes are targeted for revocation.

Kelly said he was bound to follow the rulings in those cases, “full stop,” which were issued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Trump did not warn the outlets he wanted to bar them before imposing his ban. The Justice Department issued explanations for the ban to the outlets on Tuesday, a day after they sued to block the ban.

Kelly, in his ruling, also said he was “skeptical” of the Justice Department’s claims that Trump was actually motivated by a need to safeguard national security in revoking the outlets’ access.

“Nothing in the record that predates this suit suggests that the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes was motivated by national security concerns,” Kelly wrote.

“Certainly, that is not what President Trump said when he announced that he was ‘banning’ Plaintiffs from the White House — instead, he focused on the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity of Plaintiffs’ reporting.”

Kelly also said that “nothing” in the letters to the outlets citing their purported endangering of national security with their reports suggests an urgent need to ban them.

“Indeed, some of the reporting identified by Defendants in the letters to Plaintiffs stretches back months or years,” Kelly wrote.

“Simply put — the record lacks factual support for Defendants’ contention that the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes will in fact protect national security or that national security will be endangered if the Court orders their passes reinstated while this litigation proceeds,” the judge wrote.

Kelly declined to grant a request by the Justice Department to delay the temporary restraining order against Trump’s ban from taking effect immediately.

And Kelly noted that “temporary restraining orders are generally unappealable.”

The White House didn’t immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment on the ruling.

A lawyer for the outlets, Theodore Boutrous Jr., welcomed Kelly’s ruling order, calling it “a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law.”

“We greatly appreciate the court’s swift action,” Boutrous said in a statement.

The White House, when asked for comment about the order Thursday, replied with a link to the court filing in which its director of operations notified Kelly about the measures the White House had taken to restore the press credentials of the outlets.

On Thursday, Kelly, in an order, told the outlets to file any motion seeking a preliminary injunction, which would continue to prevent the White House from implementing Trump’s ban while their lawsuit continues, by Sept. 28.

Kelly, who told the defendants in the lawsuit to respond to such a motion by Oct. 2, said in his order, “The Court will set a hearing at a later date but intends to rule expeditiously on the motion for a preliminary injunction.”

Disclosure: CNBC and MS NOW are divisions of Versant Media.