Donald Trump’s Legal Team Urges Judge to Reject Overly Broad Protective Order
In the ongoing election conspiracy case against former President Donald Trump, his legal team has issued a plea to the overseeing judge to dismiss prosecutors’ proposed protective order for evidence in the case. They argue that the order encroaches upon Trump’s First Amendment rights and is excessively restrictive.
Trump’s lawyers, representing the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner, propose a more limited protective order that would only prohibit the disclosure of “sensitive” materials, such as grand jury documents, instead of all evidence provided by the government. They insist that a blanket gag order is unnecessary.
The defense filing asserts that the proposed protective order by special counsel Jack Smith’s team infringes upon Trump’s free speech rights, especially during an election season when the government and media allies have propagated false allegations against him.
Prosecutors’ requested protective order aims to prevent Trump and his legal team from disclosing government-provided materials to anyone other than approved individuals, including defense lawyers, witnesses, and their legal representatives. The order particularly restricts the dissemination of “sensitive materials,” encompassing grand jury testimonies and sealed search warrant records. Trump would only be permitted to view, not possess, these “sensitive” documents.
Protective orders are customary in criminal cases, and prosecutors emphasize its significance due to Trump frequently using social media to discuss ongoing legal proceedings against him. They submitted a screenshot of a post from Trump’s Truth Social platform, where he vehemently declares, “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!”
Trump denies any wrongdoing in this case and a separate federal case, where he faces allegations of possessing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate located in Palm Beach, Florida.
A spokesperson for Trump justifies the social media post as political speech in response to purportedly dishonest special interest groups and Super PACs.
Prosecutors highlight their readiness to provide a substantial amount of evidence, which may include sensitive and confidential information, to Trump’s legal team. This evidence encompasses witness testimonies from the confidential grand jury investigation.
“If the defendant were to begin issuing public posts using details – or, for example, grand jury transcripts – obtained in discovery here, it could have a harmful chilling effect on witnesses or adversely affect the fair administration of justice in this case,” prosecutors argue in their motion.
Last week, Trump pleaded not guilty to four felony charges, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and conspiracy to obstruct Congress’ certification of President Joe Biden’s electoral victory. If convicted, these charges could result in a lengthy prison sentence, with the most severe offenses carrying a maximum penalty of 20 years.
This marks the third criminal case against the 2024 Republican presidential front-runner this year. However, it is the first case to hold him accountable for his actions between losing the election and the Capitol attack on January 6, 2021.
In June, Trump was charged by Smith with multiple felony counts for unlawfully retaining classified records after leaving the White House and impeding governmental efforts to retrieve them. The recently unsealed indictment in that case accuses Trump of colluding with Mar-a-Lago staff to delete security footage sought by investigators.
In a previous case, Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart imposed a similar protective order that forbids Trump and his legal team from publicly disclosing evidence without prior approval. Prosecutors now seek an additional protective order in that case, specifying further rules regarding the handling of classified evidence by the defense team.
Trump considers all these cases as attempts to undermine his 2024 campaign. His legal team intends to argue that he relied on the advice of attorneys in 2020 and that the current case infringes upon his free speech rights and his right to challenge an allegedly stolen election.
On Saturday, Trump’s lawyers requested an extension of three days to respond to the prosecutors’ request for a protective order, citing the need for further discussions. However, Judge Tanya Chutkan promptly denied this request.
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.
