The Trump White House and the ACLU: We’re All Just Here, but We Aren’t Trying to Be Afraid
Limiting Trump’s remarks about the work of special counsel Smith and his prosecutors risks undermining a vigorous debate about how public officials are doing their jobs, the ACLU wrote. The lawyers urged the court to exempt public officials from coverage of its order, except to the extent that it bars speech that threatens or provokes violence against people.
Trump’s legal team said the former president, like millions of other Americans, had every right to cast aspersions on the integrity of the 2020 election — even as senior members of his own administration repeatedly assured Trump that no widespread fraud had influenced the outcome of the race.
“If there is any constant in our democratic system of governance, it is that the marketplace of ideas — not the mandates of government functionaries or partisan prosecutors — determines the scope of public debate,” wrote defense attorneys John Lauro, Todd Blanche, Gregory Singer and Emil Bove.
Lawyers for Trump have asked a federal judge to dismiss the four-count felony indictment, including the suggestion that the U.S. Senate had acquitted him in an impeachment proceeding.
Trump stands accused of violating the rights of millions of Americans by trying to overturn their votes in favor of bogus “alternative” slates of electors. He’s denied the charges.
“It is absurd to say that President Trump could trick people who are politically knowledgeable, just by advocating his opinion on this issue, as one voice among so many millions of other people,” they said.
The Justice Department already has charged more than 1,000 people with breaking the law at the Capitol more than two years ago, many of whom have pleaded guilty and told judges they traveled to Washington after Trump urged them to “be there, will be wild.”
There is no charge against the former president on Jan. 6th. His lawyers are asking the judge to strike references to that day from the indictment as “inflammatory” to a D.C.-based jury.
Judge Chutkan in New York has ruled that the federal election interference case against Donald Trump isn’t influenced by the First Amendment
Trump is the leading candidate for the GOP nomination to return to the White House in 2024. He’s campaigning as he fights criminal cases in different places, like Florida, Ga., New York, and Washington, D.C.
Trump lawyers John Lauro and Todd Blanche call the gag order in D.C. an “unconstitutional prior restraint” and have launched an appeal, which could help to delay the trial scheduled for March 2024. The judge has paused the gag order while she waits for more legal papers.
Trump has made a number of allegations against Jack Smith and prosecutors for his special counsel will be able to respond later this week.
The risk is that Trump could inspire his supporters to violence. But their court filing said the First Amendment doesn’t give the judge license to gag him.
Judge Chutkan imposed a limited gag order on Trump, barring him from making inflammatory comments about Jack Smith and his team, court employees, and witnesses in the federal election interference case against him.
“Undisputed testimony cited by the government demonstrates that when Defendant has publicly attacked individuals, including on matters related to this case, those individuals are consequently threatened and harassed,” the judge wrote.
ACLU attorneys Brett Max Kaufman, Ben Wizner and Brian Hauss wrote that restrictions that seek to stop Trump from “targeting” prosecutors and witnesses are vague because it’s not clear what “targeting” might mean.
It could mean anything from name to identify, or it could be a lot more violent. One could target another with political advocacy or physical violence.
The prosecutor told Judge Chutkan that a woman from Texas had been arrested for making threats against the judge. A $5,000 fine has been imposed on Donald Trump in New York for failing to remove a baseless post about a law clerk from his campaign website.