Windham, NH – August 8: Former President of the United States Donald J. Trump delivers remarks at Windham High School.
Erin Clark | Boston Globe | Getty Images
A federal judge presiding over Donald Trump’s case involving allegations of election interference has resolved a dispute between the former president’s attorneys and special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecutors. The judge, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, agreed with Trump’s lawyers in rejecting the government’s request for a broader ban on the disclosure of evidence and other materials. However, she granted the Department of Justice the authority to determine which materials should be covered by the protective order.
During the hearing, the judge dismissed concerns raised by a defense attorney that the protective order could impede Trump’s political speech as he pursues the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. She made it clear that the existence of a political campaign would not influence her decision.
Trump is facing four counts related to his efforts to overturn his loss to President Joe Biden in the 2020 election. Last week, he pleaded not guilty in federal court in Washington, D.C.
The Justice Department previously highlighted Trump’s highly active and provocative presence on social media as it argued for the broader protective order. Prosecutor Thomas Windom argued in the hearing that prohibiting Trump from disclosing any and all discovery in the case was necessary to ensure witness safety and a fair trial. He warned that Trump’s request for a narrower order was simply an attempt to try the case in the media rather than in the courtroom.
Trump’s lawyers have accused the DOJ of seeking to censor a prominent presidential candidate’s political speech. They have requested an order that only prohibits the public disclosure of “genuinely sensitive materials.”
Defense attorney John Lauro described the DOJ’s order as “extraordinary.” Given that the charges against Trump, a former president and a potential candidate, were brought by the Biden administration, his potential opponent in the 2024 general election, Lauro argued that the case was in uncharted territory.
Judge Chutkan acknowledged the need to balance Trump’s First Amendment rights with the requirements of the trial. She told Lauro that if it meant Trump couldn’t say everything he wanted about potential witnesses, so be it.
The hearing in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. was the first opportunity for prosecutors and defense attorneys to present arguments before Chutkan, whom Trump has already criticized on social media.
Attorneys for former U.S. President Donald Trump Todd Blanche (R) and John Lauro (L) arrive at the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Court House on August 11, 2023, in Washington, D.C. Blanche and Lauro attended the first hearing held by U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on a protective order related to the disclosure of government evidence in Trump’s case.
Win Mcnamee | Getty Images
Chutkan, an Obama appointee known for her firm stance in other cases related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, has been targeted by Trump’s recent posts on Truth Social. Trump has accused her of conflicts of interest and expressed doubt about receiving a fair trial with her as the judge. He suggested that his case should be assigned to a different judge and moved to a different venue outside of Democrat-leaning D.C., such as West Virginia.
This is breaking news. Please check back for updates.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
