Judge Enforces Gag Order on Trump, Curbing His Unbridled Power!
Federal judge issues gag order on Trump, restricting his comments on alleged election subversion Special counsel cites need to prevent witness intimidation Prior warning from Judge Chutkan Limited gag order also in place for NY fraud trial
A federal judge issued a gag order on former President Donald Trump on Monday, placing limitations on what he can say regarding special counsel Jack Smith's federal prosecution into his alleged effort to undermine the 2020 presidential election. The order prohibits Trump from publicly targeting court personnel, potential witnesses, or the special counsel and his team. However, the order does not forbid Trump from making derogatory remarks about Washington, DC, where the jury will convene, or certain comments about the Justice Department as a whole, which were requested by the government.
Judge Tanya Chutkan emphasized that her concern was not centered around her personal preferences regarding the language used by Mr. Trump. Instead, her focus was on language that posed a threat to the fair administration of justice.
Furthermore, the judge stated that being a presidential candidate does not grant someone the unrestricted freedom to demean and defame public servants who are diligently fulfilling their professional responsibilities.
Chutkan warned that failure to comply with her orders may lead to sanctions.
After the former president faced two federal indictments, Trump expressed his anger towards prosecutors, potential witnesses, and the judge presiding over the election subversion case in Washington. Prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith's office argue that these remarks justify imposing a limited restriction on Trump's speech regarding the case.
Chutkan, whom Trump frequently targets with his attacks, cautioned the ex-president that any comments made by him or his legal team could potentially jeopardize the ongoing case.
"On Monday, during the hearing, Chutkan emphasized that Mr. Trump is a defendant in a criminal case, facing four serious charges. As he falls under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice system, it is imperative for him to abide by the conditions of his release," she warned.
"Do you agree with the fact that he lacks the authority to say and do whatever he desires?" she inquired of Trump's attorney, John Lauro, to which he promptly replied, "Absolutely."
Trump's legal representatives have vehemently opposed the suggested order, asserting that it fundamentally contradicts his rights under the First Amendment. They have further implied that the order is merely a means for President Joe Biden and the Justice Department to undermine Trump's campaigning capabilities.
Lauro alleged that the special counsel's office aimed to hinder President Trump from expressing his thoughts on current matters, highlighting that every aspect of this case has political implications.
On social media, Trump has criticized Chutkan, referring to her as a "biased, Trump Hating Judge," and labeled Smith as "deranged" and a "thug." He has also targeted specific members of his team.
Chutkan expressed disapproval of using terms like "thug" to describe a prosecutor fulfilling their duties, highlighting that such language would not be acceptable in any other criminal case. She further emphasized that running a political campaign does not grant the defendant unlimited freedom to act as they please. Additionally, she suggested that if Trump wishes to convey his belief that his prosecution is politically motivated, he can do so without resorting to inflammatory language.
After Chutkan issued her order, Trump's legal team showed little reaction within the courtroom. However, once outside, they appeared quite cheerful. One of the lawyers stepped out, informing another that they would have to reach out to their client.
Following the hearing, Trump's attorneys chose not to provide any statements.
Troubling posts targeting Smith
On Monday, Chutkan criticized Lauro for Trump's public statements directly aimed at Smith's office, arguing that his "extremely aggressive language" exceeds the limits of what a person facing criminal charges can publicly express regarding their legal proceedings.
The judge inquired why Trump's attorneys should not be opposed to restraining him from publicly attacking prosecutors during his case, as his "troubling" posts may potentially incite harm against Smith and his team. Chutkan specifically highlighted a Truth Social post made by the former president, referring to Smith as a "thug." She then questioned Lauro, "In what type of case do you believe it would be acceptable for a defendant to label the prosecutor as a thug and still maintain their freedom?"
Chutkan recalled the famous line, "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest."
Lauro vehemently criticized the suggested limitations on Trump's ability to address prosecutors, questioning the language needed to combat oppression in a society he perceives as heading towards "totalitarianism."
Lauro's statement emphasized President Trump's conviction that the prosecutor behind these proceedings is driven by political motivations, explained Lauro.
Chutkan urged him to moderate his language as she leaned back in her chair, shaking her head, while Lauro continued speaking. The judge had previously reminded Lauro that, as a defendant, Trump is subject to court-imposed limitations on publicly discussing individuals associated with the case.
Lauro has agreed,
Politics stops at this courtroom door
, but he has raised concerns regarding the feasibility of implementing further limitations during his presidential campaign. He contends that all of Trump's public statements thus far have complied with court orders.Chutkan expressed her disagreement with Lauro's statement that "what you have put in place is working" in relation to Trump's release conditions during the hearing. The judge responded by laughing loudly and instructed the attorney to refrain from making political arguments in her courtroom. Chutkan interrupted Lauro multiple times due to the arguments he presented, which claimed that Trump should not be limited in his speech while campaigning for president.
In the courtroom, Chutkan made it clear that she would not tolerate such rhetoric, as Lauro accused the special counsel's office of attempting to silence President Trump on current issues.
"Politics does not extend beyond the boundaries of this courtroom," she stated firmly.
Additionally, Chutkan emphasized to Lauro that Trump, being a criminal defendant, is obligated to abide by certain restrictions which include refraining from acts that may intimidate witnesses or jurors before the trial. In contrast, Joe Biden does not face such limitations.
During the hearing, prosecutor Molly Gaston clarified that our proposed order does not aim to impede the defendant's political aspirations or hinder his reputation defense. Gaston emphasized that the focus lies solely on the trial's participants and witnesses. Specifically, the order targets statements geared towards swaying the jurisdiction or potential jurors.
The judge added that the trial date set for early March wont change: "This trial will not yield to the election cycle, and we will not revisit the trial date."
Special counsel says limits are needed to prevent witness intimidation
Prosecutors warn that Trump's continual attacks on potential witnesses such as former Vice President Mike Pence and former Attorney General Bill Barr could potentially lead to witness intimidation by his followers.
In a filing last month, prosecutors stated, "The defendants' incessant public postings fueling anger and mistrust in the justice system, the Court, and prosecutors have already had an impact on the general public." They provided an example, saying, "On August 5, 2023, an individual was arrested for making racially motivated death threats tied to the Court's involvement in the defendants' case, after calling the Court's chambers."
Gaston stated that their intention is not to hinder Trump from campaigning or protecting his reputation, as their proposed order does not aim to do so.
"This pertains to the trial's participants and witnesses," stated Gaston. "Its scope is restricted solely to these individuals, and it exclusively encompasses statements intended to impact the venue or prospective jurors."
Chutkan previously warned Trump
When he initially appeared in Chutkan's courtroom in late August on allegations of unlawfully attempting to disrupt the outcome of the 2020 election, the judge cautioned Trump about making "provocative" remarks during the trial.
"Legal proceedings do not resemble elections, where victory can be attained through campaign rallies, media coverage, and public speeches," Chutkan stated at that moment, further emphasizing: "I am prepared to take any necessary actions to ensure the impartiality of these proceedings."
Limited gag order issued in NY fraud trial
Regardless of how limited they may be, any constraints on Trump's speech would probably be raised in subsequent appeals, alongside defense counsels' assertions that the federal lawsuits against Trump are being expedited to guarantee his conviction prior to the election.Chutkan wouldn't be the first judge to place restrictions on the former president's speech if she chooses to do so. In October, the judge presiding over the New York civil fraud trial against Trump issued a gag order against him after he verbally assaulted a court staff member.
"Judge Arthur Engoron issued a stern order, explicitly forbidding all parties involved from publicly posting, emailing, or speaking about any members of my staff," in response to Trump's accusation that his clerk was romantically involved with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, and demanding her dismissal in a social media post.
Engoron emphasized that failure to comply with this directive would lead to severe sanctions.
This story has been updated with additional developments.
