Prosecutors in Donald Trump’s criminal hush money case are urging the judge to uphold portions of a gag order that restrict him from criticizing jurors and court staff. They argue that Trump’s history of inflammatory statements and his supporters’ threats against jurors necessitate these restrictions. The gag order was issued in March and prevents Trump from making public statements about witnesses, jurors, and others involved in the case, although it does not limit comments about the judge or the Manhattan District Attorney who prosecuted the case. Trump, who was convicted on 34 felony counts, is set to be sentenced on July 11.
Trump’s defense attorneys are calling for the gag order to be lifted now that the trial has concluded, citing the restrictions on his First Amendment rights. They argue that Trump should be free to address the case as he campaigns for the White House, pointing to comments made by President Biden and continued criticism from key prosecution witnesses, Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels. Prosecutors have agreed that the restriction on statements about trial witnesses can be lifted but maintain that restrictions on statements about court staff and members of the prosecution should remain due to an increased threat situation. More than 60 actionable threats have been directed towards the district attorney, his family, and court staff since April, including social media posts disclosing addresses and photos with sniper sights aimed at those involved in the case.
The judge overseeing the case is expected to issue a ruling on the gag order soon, possibly before Trump’s upcoming debate with President Biden. Earlier this week, New York’s top court declined to hear Trump’s appeal on the gag order, finding it does not raise substantial constitutional issues that warrant immediate intervention. The prosecution’s argument is based on fears of Trump’s damaging rhetoric and the safety of those involved in the case, while Trump’s defense team emphasizes his right to free speech and the need to fully address the case.
Overall, the conflict over the gag order in Trump’s hush money case highlights the tension between protecting the judicial process and upholding First Amendment rights. Prosecutors stress the need to prevent Trump’s inflammatory statements and threats against court staff and jurors, while his defense team argues for his right to speak freely and address the case publicly, especially as he campaigns for the presidency. The judge’s ruling on the gag order will play a crucial role in determining the extent to which Trump can publicly discuss the case going forward, with implications for both the legal proceedings and the broader political landscape. As the legal battle continues, the balance between free speech and judicial integrity remains a key concern.
