Former President Donald Trump is once again trying to nix the partial gag order imposed on him ahead of his federal 2020 election trial.
Trump’s attorneys asked the full DC Circuit Court of Appeals to look at the matter Monday, contending the order was upheld based on faulty legal reasoning.
The restrictions imposed by US District Judge Tanya Chutkan were narrowed by a three-judge appeals panel earlier this month, but the 77-year-old is still prohibited from rhetorically attacking known or “reasonably foreseeable” witnesses in the case.
In his filing, Trump’s lawyer John Sauer argued that the first appeals decision “overlooks and misapprehends” points of law and mischaracterized Trump’s statements.
Sauer also contended that the judges papered over the significance of Trump’s 2024 campaign, and argued prosecutors lacked proof of “threats or harassment to any prosecutor, potential witness, or court staffer” affected by the order.
Notably, Chutkan herself has faced threats in connection with the Trump case, which is scheduled for trial in March of next year.
“The panel opinion here treats the fact that President Trump is the leading candidate for President as virtually insignificant,” Sauer wrote in the 97-page filing.
“The panel opinion relies heavily on the audience’s anticipated reaction to President Trump’s speech,” he added. “Under the First Amendment, public speakers ‘are not chargeable with the danger’ that their audiences ‘might react with disorder or violence.'”
Earlier this month, after Chutkan spurned Trump’s claim that the indictment should be tossed out against him on the basis of presidential immunity, his team appealed to the Supreme Court, which is mulling whether to take up that challenge.
Special counsel Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court to rule on the matter quickly in order to keep the trial on track to begin March 4.
Last week, Chutkan took note of that appeal in a filing announcing that “any further proceedings” in the case were put on hold. She also noted that the partial gag order would remain in effect.
“If a criminal defendant could bypass those critical safeguards merely by asserting immunity and then appealing its denial, then during the appeal’s pendency, the defendant could irreparably harm any future proceedings and their participants,” she wrote.
Trump has pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing, as he has in all four cases pending against him.
Last week, the high court announced plans to take up a separate case related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots that could have major implications for Trump’s federal election indictment.
At issue is the scope of the charge of obstruction of an official proceeding, which Trump faces in addition to three other counts.
Separately, Trump is mounting a First Amendment challenge to the 2020 Georgia election subversion case, in which he is facing 13 counts.
Trump is the odds-on 2024 GOP frontrunner for the party’s presidential nomination.