Court seems inclined to keep restricting Trump's trial speech. But gag order could be narrowed

[BumRushDaShow]

Last edited Mon Nov 20, 2023, 05:44 PM - Edit history (4)

Source: AP

Updated 3:39 PM EST, November 20, 2023


WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court appeared inclined Monday to reimpose at least some restrictions on Donald Trump’s speech in his landmark election subversion case. But the judges wrestled with how to craft a gag order that doesn’t infringe on the former president’s free speech rights or prevent him from defending himself on the campaign trail.

The three judges on the panel asked skeptical and at times aggressive questions of attorneys on both sides while weighing whether to put back in place an order from a trial judge that barred Trump from inflammatory comments against prosecutors, potential witnesses and court staff.

The judges raised a litany of hypothetical scenarios that could arise in the months ahead as they considered how to fashion a balance between an order that protects Trump’s First Amendment rights and the need to protect “the criminal trial process and its integrity and its truth finding function.”

“There’s a balance that has to be undertaken here, and it’s a very difficult balance in this context,” Judge Patricia Millett told Cecil VanDevender, a lawyer with special counsel Jack Smith’s office. “But we have to use a careful scalpel here and not step into really sort of skewing the political arena, don’t we?”


Read more: https://apnews.com/article/trump-justice-department-capitol-riot-f6e37b4193a408a990dd3837609acc8e

---

Article updated.

Previous articles/headlines -

Appeals court weighs reinstating gag order on Trump in landmark DC election case

Updated 12:44 PM EST, November 20, 2023


WASHINGTON (AP) -- A lawyer for Donald Trump urged a federal appeals court Monday to revoke a gag order against the former president in a landmark criminal case, while a prosecutor argued that curbs are necessary to prevent intimidation and threats against participants in the case that charges Trump with scheming to overturn the 2020 election.

Appeals court judges asked skeptical and at times aggressive questions of attorneys on both sides while weighing whether to put back in place an order from a trial judge that barred Trump from inflammatory comments against prosecutors, potential witnesses and court staff.

The judges raised a litany of hypothetical scenarios that could arise in the months ahead as they considered how to fashion a balance between an order that protects Trump's First Amendment rights and the need to protect "the criminal trial process and its integrity and its truth finding function."

"There's a balance that has to be undertaken here, and it's a very difficult balance in this context," Judge Patricia Millett told Cecil VanDevender, a lawyer with special counsel Jack Smith's office. "But we have to use a careful scalpel here and not step into really sort of skewing the political arena, don't we?"

Trump lawyers urge federal appeals court to revoke gag order in DC election case

Updated 10:16 AM EST, November 20, 2023


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Lawyers for former President Donald Trump urged a federal appeals court on Monday to revoke a gag order in the federal case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

"The order is unprecedented and it sets a terrible precedent for future restrictions on core political speech," Trump attorney John Sauer told a three-judge panel.

Prosecutors with special counsel Jack Smith's team, meanwhile, are urging the court to put back in place an order barring the Republican former president from making inflammatory statements about potential witnesses and lawyers in the case.

The prosecutors say those restrictions are necessary to prevent Trump from undermining confidence in the court system and intimidating people who may be called to testify against him. Defense lawyers call the gag order an unconstitutional muzzling of Trump's free speech rights and say prosecutors have presented no evidence to support the idea that his words have caused harm or made anyone feel threatened.

Original article/headline -

An appeals court is set to hear arguments asking for Trump's gag order to be put back in place

Updated 3:03 AM EST, November 20, 2023


WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court is hearing arguments Monday on whether to reinstate a gag order against Donald Trump in the federal case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Prosecutors with special counsel Jack Smith's team will urge a three-judge panel of the Washington-based appeals court to put back in place an order barring the former president from making inflammatory statements about lawyers in the case and potential witnesses.

The prosecutors say those restrictions are necessary to prevent Trump from undermining confidence in the court system and intimidating people who may be called to testify against him. Defense lawyers have called the gag order an unconstitutional muzzling of Trump's free speech rights and say prosecutors have presented no evidence to support the idea that his words have caused harm or made anyone feel threatened.

The gag order is one of multiple contentious issues being argued ahead of the landmark March 2024 trial. Defense lawyers are also trying to get the case dismissed by arguing that Trump, as a former president, is immune from prosecution and protected by the First Amendment from being charged. The outcome of Monday's arguments won't affect those constitutional claims, but it will set parameters on what Trump as both a criminal defendant and leading presidential candidate can and cannot say ahead of the trial.

[msfiddlestix]

1. Trying to keep up. I thought this request was made to the judge presiding over the trial? n/t

[BumRushDaShow]

4. IIRC, there are 3 different courts with some form of gag order in various states of appeal

This one is the federal one (Jack Smith/Judge Chutkan).

The other 2 are the GA state one (Fani Willis) and the NY state civil fraud trial one, which had been in the news more recently that got temporarily lifted (Judge Enrgoron).

[msfiddlestix]

9. Thank you. It was actually Chutkan I *thought* had ruled on a somewhat stronger order, just last week?

maybe I've got it mixed up with another judge's ruling. All of the orders so far has been rather weak tea relative to the continuous and worsening violations, though in my mind.

thanks for updating, though!

[BumRushDaShow]

10. I think all of them updated their orders within the past couple weeks.

The NY state one was temporarily lifted on appeal (I think Engoron had tightened his orders twice now). But the federal one was just heard today. In GA with the leak of the proffer videos, that one got tightened as well.

The normal process is to slowly escalate to "provide an opportunity for compliance", otherwise it is sure to be lifted on appeal.

[msfiddlestix]

11. Right, can you imagine any appeals court lifting for THIS defendant? Oh. wait. yes we can.

dangerously slow process for Individual one.

[cstanleytech]

2. I believe that the gag order was 100% more that reasonable if I was reading it correctly and that it

was aimed only at preventing him from attacking some limited people such as the judges assistant.

[BumRushDaShow]

5. The one you are talking about was the NY state civil fraud case gag order

where he was ranting against the NY Judge's clerk.

[cstanleytech]

6. Ahhh. Still considering Trumps threats in general I think a gag order might still be in order.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Particularly if a trial hasn't started yet and you may have tainting of a jury pool!

[LiberalFighter]

3. Just now listening to it.

One of the judges is really hitting back at Trump's attorney.

Basically what I am hearing is that judge is saying an order is not being based on something happening. But identifying what is acceptable or not acceptable.

[ancianita]

8. Related to the AP:

Prosecutors countered that Trump was seeking special treatment and urged the appeals court not to give it to him.

In their filing, government attorneys said Trump maintains “that it is not enough for him to be able to defend himself in court, publicly profess his innocence, criticize the presiding judge, characterize the prosecution as politically motivated, and criticize the platforms and policies of his political opponents. He must also be allowed to engage in a concerted campaign of targeting witnesses and public servants like court staff and career prosecutors, and even their families, with inflammatory language likely to result in harassment, intimidation, and threats.”

“No other criminal defendant or defense attorney could credibly make such a claim, and the Court should decline the defendant’s request to fashion a special rule solely for him,” they added.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-attorneys-federal-prosecutors-face-gag-order-election-interferen-rcna125749

The government's "due process above and beyond" argument, along with the "1A should not be absolute for Trump" argument, should sway the judges to back Chutkan's entirely fair and clear partial order, imo.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

12. Oh gag his foul mouth

[republianmushroom]

13. So, if you are arrested and want to bad mouth LE. the court, and the DA, run for any elected office.

And you can then claim your 1st Amendment rights are being violated. Got it.