U. S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan will hear arguments Monday to impose a gag order on Donald Trump.
Federal prosecutors have asked Chutkan, who oversees Trump’s interference in the federal election, to impose a strict gag order that would prevent him from making “incendiary” and “intimidating” comments about witnesses, lawyers and others involved in the case.
The former Republican president is charged with four counts similar to his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden, adding conspiracy to defraud the U. S. government and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. This is one of four criminal cases Trump faces as he seeks to regain the White House. He has pleaded guilty to all charges.
The ruling on whether or not to impose a gag order is a vital check on Chutkan, a former Obama appointee who herself was targeted by Trump’s attacks after being randomly assigned to the case.
As the Associated Press has pointed out, he will have to balance the desire to protect the integrity of the judicial process with the presidential candidate’s right to preserve himself in public, pursuant to the First Amendment. If a gag order is imposed, Chutkan will have on how it could be enforced and how to make sure it doesn’t fuel accusations of political persecution of Trump.
“She wants to think about the serious threat that it’s not just her words that can cause violence, but that she may play a role in the conspiracy theories that Trump supporters tend to believe, and that her act of imposing silence can cause a very big threat. A disturbing reaction,” Catherine Ross, a professor at George Washington University Law School, told the AP.
“If we allow that to prevent you from doing what you’re asked to do, it’s a huge challenge to the rule of law. But on the other hand, if I were a judge, I would definitely think about it. “” she said.
Erwin Chemerinsky, a jurist and dean of law at the University of California, Berkeley, argued that a gag order “would infringe on freedom of speech and serve no purpose. “
Trump “is entitled to relaxed speech, though I hate what he has to say,” he wrote in a recent op-ed.
“Anyone, according to him, can criticize a prosecutor, a prosecutor and a judge. Of course, no one has a First Amendment right to intimidate witnesses, but there is no indication that his speech has reached that level. “
While noting that there are fears that “Trump’s incessant complaining about the proceedings will undermine his legitimacy and even lead to violence,” he wrote that “the government, by adding a court, will never be able to attempt to bolster its legitimacy by silencing its critics. “
Chemerinksy added that if Chatkan were to impose a gag order, she would have to be willing to enforce it if she violated her terms. “In other words, she will have to be willing to hold him in contempt if he speaks in spite of silence,” she wrote.
Chutkan imposed a protective order in the case and warned that violating that order or making inflammatory comments could cause him to go ahead with the trial, which is expected to begin in March, under the threat of a tainted jury.
Federal prosecutors also asked Chutkan to force Trump to tell them whether he intended to protect himself, arguing that he was following the recommendation of his lawyers.
Trump and his lawyers have “publicly and repeatedly announced that he intends to seek the suggestion of counsel as a central component of his defense,” the special suggestion from Jack Smith’s team wrote in the motion filed Tuesday.
They sought a formal order forcing Trump to disclose his plans by Dec. 18 “in the face of any disruption of the pretrial calendar and any delay in the trial. “
This notice may simply give merit to the prosecutors in this case.
The filing states that if Trump relies on the recommendation of counsel for his defense, he “waives attorney-client privilege for all communications related to this defense, and the government is entitled to additional investigations and would possibly conduct a more thorough investigation. “which would possibly require further investigation. ” Litigation and Information. According to the record, 25 witnesses invoked attorney-client privilege when they concealed investigation data.
Trump declined to comment.
Khaleda Rahman is Newsweek’s senior journalist founded in London, UK. It focuses on abortion rights, race, education, sexual abuse, and capital punishment. Khaleda joined Newsweek in 2019 and in the past worked at MailOnline in London, New York and Sydney. He is a graduate of University College London. Languages: English.
You can reach Khaleda by emailing k. rahman@newsweek. com