As Hermione Granger once said, "You can't Apparate inside the Hogwarts grounds, how often do I have to tell you?"
Clearly, she didn't tell anyone enough times for it to stick with the author who created her, because JK Rowling has failed to adhere to that rule in the first Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald trailer. The trailer starts with the return to Hogwarts, with the famous castle lovingly bathed in white spring sunshine, all ethereal like.
And then the entire thing is ruined by the sight of three Ministry Of Magic officials - including the Minister himself - apparating into the grounds of Hogwarts ahead of a meeting with Dumbledore. That's right, APPARATING INSIDE HOGWARTS GROUNDS.
So is this a massive plot-hole?
There are those who will say that the events of the Fantastic Beasts movies will explain WHY there is a block on Apparition in the school's grounds...
But there's a flaw to that logic. In fact, there are several.
First, the logic of having a ban on apparation generally shouldn't need there to be a catastrophic event to precede them. If you think about it, Hogwarts as a boarding school has a duty of care to the children on the level of a parent and the idea of them allowing anyone with knowledge of the school (so any former student, which is most of the country's magical community) to drop in with impunity is insanity. And that's without mentioning the ban existing to stop students abusing the magic (which they definitely would).
And then you add the fact that this is a time of great turmoil. Grindelwald already has followers by this point, some of whom could be former Hogwarts students. They could attack the school if they so desired, which they might given Dumbledore's presence there and the links between the professor and Grindelwald (and their bad blood).
Not only that, but by this point in the movie, Grindelwald will have escaped (an upcoming LEGO set confirms his escape comes when he's being transported in that carriage seen in the trailer), amplifying the urgency behind being extra cautious. Especially if you're as valuable a target to him as Dumbledore. We know he's escaped by this point because Newt is already in Paris, where he's sent on Dumbledore's orders - presumably after their conversation on the London rooftops in which they discuss Grindelwald.
And don't forget, if the Minstry are aware of Dumbledore working with Newt Scamander, then so too is Grindelwald. He has already proven how deep he can go undercover and his influence stretches far enough for any move against him to be deemed politically dangerous (hence the Ministry's apparent appeasement approach). So he'd have special reason to target Dumbledore.
But what of the suggestion that there could be exceptions to the Apparation shield? That the Minister is enough of a special case to preclude him from the shield and allow him and his employees to apparate anywhere without censure. That's all well and good, but Grindelwald was in disguise as Graves, a high-ranking Ministry official, during the events of the first movie and there's no way Hogwarts would be dumb enough to not make allowances in case that were the case again.
Besides which, at one point in the Potter books, Dumbledore makes it clear to Cornelius Fudge that the Ministry has little influence on how the school operates when he tries to implement his Educational Decrees, making the school an annex of the government. The school is autonomous and wouldn't be subject to that sort of loophole.
So, basically, Rowling's script is going to have to come up with a reason for that apparation being allowed that makes allowances for those points and which doesn't simply rely on Dumbledore turning off the apparition ban (not that he's even the Headmaster at this point). Because if this was an expected house call, there's no way the Ministers would have apparated that far from his office. It just wouldn't make sense.
Let's all wait with baited breath to see how the film explains all of this...