Here's what Judge Chutkan's gag order limits Trump from saying
From CNN's Holmes Lybrand, Hannah Rabinowitz and Katelyn Polantz
In October, a federal judge issued a gag order on former President Donald Trump, limiting what he can say about special counsel Jack Smith’s federal prosecution into his alleged attempt to subvert in the 2020 presidential election.
The order restricts Trump’s ability to publicly target court personnel, potential witnesses or the special counsel and his staff. The order did not impose restrictions on disparaging comments about Washington, DC, – where the jury will take place – or certain comments about the Justice Department at large, both of which the government requested.
“This is not about whether I like the language Mr. Trump uses,” Judge Tanya Chutkan said. “This is about language that presents a danger to the administration of justice.”
“His presidential candidacy does not give him carte blanche to vilify public servants who are simply doing their jobs,” the judge added.
Following the two federal indictments against the former president, Trump has lashed out against prosecutors, potential witnesses and the judge overseeing the election subversion case in Washington. Prosecutors with special counsel Jack Smith’s office say these comments are enough to warrant a narrow restriction on Trump’s speech around the case.
Chutkan, often the target of Trump’s attacks, warned the former president that comments he or his attorneys make could threaten the case.
“Mr. Trump is a criminal defendant. He is facing four felony charges. He is under the supervision of the criminal justice system and he must follow his conditions of release,” Chutkan said during a hearing in October.
“He does not have the right to say and do exactly what he pleases. Do you agree with that?” she asked Trump attorney John Lauro, who responded: “100%.”
“There 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, and … target specific witnesses with attacks on their character and credibility,” Smith’s team told the US DC Circuit Court of Appeals in a filing.
Trump is asking the appeals court to undo the limited gag order issued last month by District Judge Tanya Chutkan. The former president has already failed once in his bid to undo the gag order, and the appeals court is set to hear oral arguments on the matter next week.
In a brief earlier this month, Trump’s legal team told the appeals court that Chutkan went too far when she issued the order, which it called “sweepingly overbroad,” and repeated arguments that the order amounts to an unconstitutional check on his speech and limits his ability to campaign. Republican attorneys general from 18 states echoed the claims in a “friend of the court” brief, urging the court to strike the order down.
Smith’s office said in the new filing that the order “was based on well-supported factual findings, narrowly tailored to advance a compelling interest, and more than sufficiently clear to provide the defendant with fair notice of how to conduct himself.”
A federal appeals court in Washington, DC, is set to hear arguments today about a gag order issued on former President Donald Trump by the judge overseeing his federal 2020 election subversion case. The order restricts Trump’s ability to publicly target court personnel, witnesses or special counsel Jack Smith and his staff.
In a court filing Friday, Trump's team urged the court to undo the order and argued that federal judge Tanya Chutkan had essentially inserted herself into the 2024 election by attempting to restrict his ability to talk openly about the case.
Listen live to oral arguments here beginning at 9:30 a.m. ET.
In October, a federal judge issued a gag order on former President Donald Trump, limiting what he can say about special counsel Jack Smith’s federal prosecution into his alleged attempt to subvert in the 2020 presidential election.
The order restricts Trump’s ability to publicly target court personnel, potential witnesses or the special counsel and his staff. The order did not impose restrictions on disparaging comments about Washington, DC, – where the jury will take place – or certain comments about the Justice Department at large, both of which the government requested.
“This is not about whether I like the language Mr. Trump uses,” Judge Tanya Chutkan said. “This is about language that presents a danger to the administration of justice.”
“His presidential candidacy does not give him carte blanche to vilify public servants who are simply doing their jobs,” the judge added.
Following the two federal indictments against the former president, Trump has lashed out against prosecutors, potential witnesses and the judge overseeing the election subversion case in Washington. Prosecutors with special counsel Jack Smith’s office say these comments are enough to warrant a narrow restriction on Trump’s speech around the case.
Chutkan, often the target of Trump’s attacks, warned the former president that comments he or his attorneys make could threaten the case.
“Mr. Trump is a criminal defendant. He is facing four felony charges. He is under the supervision of the criminal justice system and he must follow his conditions of release,” Chutkan said during a hearing in October.
“He does not have the right to say and do exactly what he pleases. Do you agree with that?” she asked Trump attorney John Lauro, who responded: “100%.”
“There 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, and … target specific witnesses with attacks on their character and credibility,” Smith’s team told the US DC Circuit Court of Appeals in a filing.
Trump is asking the appeals court to undo the limited gag order issued last month by District Judge Tanya Chutkan. The former president has already failed once in his bid to undo the gag order, and the appeals court is set to hear oral arguments on the matter next week.
In a brief earlier this month, Trump’s legal team told the appeals court that Chutkan went too far when she issued the order, which it called “sweepingly overbroad,” and repeated arguments that the order amounts to an unconstitutional check on his speech and limits his ability to campaign. Republican attorneys general from 18 states echoed the claims in a “friend of the court” brief, urging the court to strike the order down.
Smith’s office said in the new filing that the order “was based on well-supported factual findings, narrowly tailored to advance a compelling interest, and more than sufficiently clear to provide the defendant with fair notice of how to conduct himself.”
