Trump Lawyers Fight Against Gag Order in Election Subversion Lawsuit

DC Circuit Judge Patricia Millett suggested a difference between campaign rhetoric and speech intended to disrupt or corrupt the criminal justice process.

Her comments during the hearing indicate that she may be inclined to impose some form of speech restrictions against Trump, rather than agreeing with his stance to completely eliminate the gag order.

Trump lawyer John Sauer argued, “Criminal speech, obviously, is subject to restriction. But core political speech, that’s part of campaign speech,” in defense of lifting the gag order.

Interrupting him, Millet countered: “Labeling it ‘core political speech’ begs the question of whether it is in fact political speech or aimed at derailing or corrupting the criminal justice process. You can’t simply label it that way and conclude your balancing tests.” She added, “We have to balance.”

Sauer responded by arguing that the speech potentially being restricted by the gag order is “inextricably entwined with the issues that are being publicly debated in the context of the campaign.”