Trump gag order is reinstated
Federal judge in election case rejects lawyers’ request
A federal judge reinstated a gag order on former President Donald Trump on Sunday that had been temporarily placed on hold nine days earlier, reimposing restrictions on what Trump can say about witnesses and prosecutors in the case in which he stands accused of seeking to overturn the 2020 election.
In making her decision, the judge, Tanya Chutkan, also denied a request by Trump’s lawyers to freeze the gag order for what could have been a considerably longer period, saying it can remain in effect as a federal appeals court in Washington reviews it.
Chutkan’s ruling about the order was posted publicly on PACER, a federal court database, late Sunday, but her detailed order explaining her reasoning was not immediately available because of what appeared to be a glitch in the computer system.
The dispute about the gag order, which was initially put in place Oct. 16 after several rounds of court filings and a hard-fought hearing in U.S. District Court in Washington, has for weeks pitted two significant legal arguments against each other.
From the start, Trump’s lawyers, largely led by John Lauro, have argued that the order was not merely a violation of the former president’s First Amendment rights. Rather, the order “silenced” him at a critical moment: just as he has been shoring up his position as the Republican Party’s leading candidate for president in the 2024 election.
Federal prosecutors working for the special counsel, Jack Smith, have countered that even though Trump is running for the country’s highest office, he does not have permission to issue public statements threatening or intimidating people involved in the election interference case, especially if those remarks might incite violence in those who read or hear them.
When she first imposed the gag order, Chutkan sided with the government, acknowledging Trump’s First Amendment rights but saying she intended to treat him like any other criminal defendant — even if he was running for president.
Trump’s constitutional rights could not permit him “to launch a pretrial smear campaign” against people involved in the case, she said, adding, “No other defendant would be allowed to do so, and I’m not going to allow it in this case.”
Soon after Chutkan issued the gag order, Lauro began the process of appealing it. A few days later, he asked Chutkan to freeze the order until the appeals court made its own decision, saying that the ruling she had put in place was “breathtakingly overbroad” and “unconstitutionally vague.”
That same day, Chutkan placed the order on hold for one week, inviting further arguments about whether it should be in effect while Trump’s lawyers appealed it.
In response, prosecutors working for Smith argued that the gag order needed to be put back in place at once because although it was on hold, Trump had violated it by attacking Smith at least three times by name.
Trump, the prosecutors noted, had also violated the frozen order by twice making public comments about Mark Meadows, his former chief of staff, who could appear as a witness in the case.
“The defendant has capitalized on the court’s administrative stay to, among other prejudicial conduct, send an unmistakable and threatening message” to Meadows, prosecutors wrote to Chutkan. “Unless the court lifts the administrative stay, the defendant will not stop his harmful and prejudicial attacks.”
Trump is also facing a more limited gag order in a civil case in New York, where he is standing trial on charges of having fraudulently inflated the value of his real estate holdings for years.
Last week, Justice Arthur F. Engoron, the judge overseeing the New York civil case, fined Trump $10,000 for violating the order, which bars the former president from going after members of the court’s staff.