
Special Counsel Jack Smithās office defended a gag order issued against former President Donald Trump in his 2020 election case Tuesday by arguing that Trump does not have āan unfettered right to try his case in the media.ā
Trumpās lawyers wrote last week that District Judge Tanya Chutkan ālacks the authority to muzzleā the former presidentās speech in violation of his First Amendment rights and the rights of ātens of millions of Americans to engage in and hear core political speech in the middle of an ongoing Presidential campaign.ā Prosecutors pushed back in a 67-page filingTuesday, explaining that district courts have āan affirmative dutyā to prevent trial participants from making statements that are likely to āprejudiceā the proceedings.
āThere has never been a criminal case in which a court has granted a defendant an unfettered right to try his case in the media, malign the prosecutor and his family, andāafter threatening witnesses and others ⦠target specific witnesses with attacks on their character and credibility, calling one a āweakling[]ā and a ācoward[]ā and suggesting that anotherās actions warrant the āpunishmentā of āDEATH!āā prosecutors wrote.
Citing the Supreme Courtās 1966 decision in Sheppard v. Maxwell, Smithās office said that the court can act when a party tries to influence the case āthrough the use of the meeting-hall, the radio, and the newspaperā instead of legal argument.
Prosecutors pointed to a call Chutkan allegedly received the day after one of Trumpās posts ā in which he said āIF YOU GO AFTER ME, IāM COMING AFTER YOU!ā ā where the individual threatened to kill her if Trump is not elected in 2024.
āThat episode was part of a pattern, stretching back years, in which people publicly targeted by the defendant are, as a result of the targeting, subject to harassment, threats, and intimidation,ā the filings tates.
Moreover, prosecutors argued the order leaves Trump free to do what he must to ārun for office while defending himself in court.ā
āAnd the distinctions it draws between criticizing the policies of a political rival or describing the prosecution as politically motivated, on the one hand, and targeting trial participants or their expected trial testimony, on the other, is readily comprehensible,ā prosecutors wrote.
Earlier this month, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia temporarily paused the gag order pending Trumpās appeal. Oral arguments before a three-judge panel are scheduled for Nov. 20.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporterās byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contactĀ [email protected].
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporterās byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contactĀ [email protected].
