Trump's attorneys, in hearing on Jan. 6 case, call proposed gag order 'censorship' – Yahoo! Voices
The federal judge in former President Donald Trump’s federal election interference case in Washington, D.C., said that “a court is entitled to draw restrictions” after attorneys for Trump accused the government of censorship Monday in a hearing on the special counsel’s request for a limited gag order in the case.
Special counsel Jack Smith’s team is urging U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to impose restrictions on Trump in order to protect potential jurors, citing the former president’s conduct on social media regarding people involved in his various legal battles.
Trump in August pleaded not guilty to charges of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called “fake electors,” using the Justice Department to conduct “sham election crime investigations,” trying to enlist the vice president to “alter the election results,” and promoting false claims of a stolen election as the Jan. 6 riot raged — all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in power.
MORE: Citing Trump’s social posts, special counsel asks for juror protections election interference case
After Judge Chutkan went through different categories of statements Trump has made — including a social media post in which Trump that called D.C. “a filthy and crime ridden embarrassment to the nation” — Trump attorney John Lauro pushed back, saying Trump’s statements were simply criticizing the Biden administration, and were about “public policy.”
“Those statements can be a double-edged sword,” Chutkan replied.
Lauro, who kept referring to the proposed gag order as censorship, was then interrupted by Chutkan, who said, “Mr. Lauro, you keep saying censorship. There is no question that a court is entitled to draw restrictions.”
“We’re talking about restrictions to ensure there is a fair administration of justice,” the judge added.
She asked prosecutors whether the proposed gag order would prevent Trump from making public attacks on the Biden administration, such as calling President Biden “Crooked Joe Biden,” to which prosecutor Molly Gaston Gaston answered that such statements would not violate the order.
On the other hand, said Gaston, Trump’s attacks calling the Justice Department “The Department of Injustice” would present some concern, given the influence it could ultimately have on the jury pool.
When Judge Chutkan asked Gaston whether an unfounded statement by Trump on the prosecution being directed by President Biden would be barred by the order, Gaston said it would not because Biden is not a witness.
“I’m sitting here thinking George Orwell would have a field day” with what the government is proposing, Lauro said of the proposed order at one point.
“George Orwell would definitely have a field day,” Chutkan responded back, sarcastically.
The judge then asked Lauro, a former career prosecutor himself, answer whether such statements would be appropriate from any defendant in a criminal case.
MORE: Trump moves to dismiss federal election interference case, citing ‘presidential immunity’
“What I want you to do is answer my question as to why a criminal defendant should be allowed to call a prosecutor a “thug,” she said. “Tell me how the word ‘thug’ is justified here.”
“It may not be the word that you like, but he’s entitled under the First Amendment to make those statements,” Lauro said.
Earlier , after Lauro began his remarks by accusing the government of mounting a political operation to silence Trump as he runs for president in 2024, the judge said, “Let me stop you right there, Mr. Lauro.”
“Mr. Trump is a criminal defendant. He’s facing four felony charges,” she said. “He must comply with conditions of release. He does not have the right to say and do exactly as he pleases.”
Lauro pushed back against the proposed order, saying Trump’s statements and posts are about “news of the day” and about issues related to his campaign.
MORE: Judge sets start date of March 4 for Trump’s federal election interference trial
“I understand you have a message you want to get out,” Chutkan said in a later exchange.
Lauro continued to press forward, arguing that President Joe Biden would not be barred under such an order to speak publicly about the case.
“[Biden] is not a party to this case,” Chutkan said. “He’s not subject to conditions of release.”
She later added, “Politics stops at this courthouse door.”
Chutkan also questioned the special counsel’s office on what punishments should be in place should Trump violate any order, should she impose one. Gaston answered that penalties could include home detention, financial penalties, an admonishment from Judge Chutkan herself or even a reconsideration of his pretrial release.
Lauro responded that enforcement of the order would be “impossible.”
MORE: Special counsel alerts court to Trump’s social media post
He also argued Trump has not, to date, violated his conditions of release as previously imposed by the court.
“There’s been no threats, no accusations against any witnesses,” Lauro said.
In a court filing last week, Smith’s team specifically cited Trump’s post about a law clerk in his ongoing $250 million civil fraud trial in New York, which prompted the judge in that case to issue an oral order restricting all parties from speaking publicly about his court staff.
“There are other good reasons in this case for the Court to impose these restrictions and enforce this District’s standard prohibition against publicizing jurors’ identities,” Smith’s team said in its filing. “Chief among them is the defendant’s continued use of social media as a weapon of intimidation in court proceedings.”
MORE: Trump pleads not guilty on Jan. 6 charges, calls it ‘sad day for America’
Trump’s attorneys have vehemently opposed the gag order request in court filings, calling it an affront to Trump’s First Amendment rights and accusing Smith’s team of having political motivations due to Trump’s strong standing in the 2024 presidential race.
“Like his previous public disinformation campaign regarding the 2020 presidential election, the defendant’s recent extrajudicial statements are intended to undermine public confidence in an institution — the judicial system — and to undermine confidence in and intimidate individuals — the Court, the jury pool, witnesses, and prosecutors,” the special counsel said in a filing last month.
The trial is currently scheduled to begin in March.
Trump’s attorneys, in hearing on Jan. 6 case, call proposed gag order ‘censorship’ originally appeared on abcnews.go.com