UPDATED 5:11 P.M.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Donald Trump’s lawyers told a federal judge on Monday that strictly limiting the public release of evidence ahead of his 2020 election trial would violate his free speech rights, after prosecutors warned the former U.S. president could use that information in intimidate witnesses.
Federal prosecutors had sought a protective order against the former U.S. president, saying that Trump could improperly disclose confidential evidence received from prosecutors without the order.
In a 29-page filing to the U.S. District Court in Washington, Trump’s attorneys on Monday did not directly address the assertion of potential witness intimidation.
They said they recognized some documents should be shielded from the public, such as materials from a grand jury investigation that led to last week’s indictment accusing Trump of orchestrating a plot to overturn his 2020 election loss.
“However, the need to protect that information does not require a blanket gag order over all documents produced by the government,” they wrote in the court papers filed on Monday.
“In a trial about First Amendment rights, the government seeks to restrict First Amendment rights,” Trump’s attorneys said, referring to the right of free speech guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
A spokesperson for U.S. Special Jack Smith’s office did not immediately return a request for comment. Protective orders are typically issued in criminal cases.
Trump on Thursday pleaded not guilty to federal charges that conspired to try to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democratic President Joe Biden. It was the third criminal case brought against Trump so far this year.
At his arraignment on Thursday, Trump swore to not intimidate witnesses or communicate with them about the case without legal counsel present.
Prosecutors on Friday, in their request for a protective order from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, pointed to a post from Trump on his Truth Social site that said, “IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!”
Smith’s office said the post could suggest that Trump, front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, might try to intimidate witnesses.
Under a process known as discovery, prosecutors must provide defendants with the evidence against them so they can prepare a defense. Prosecutors in their Friday filing said they are prepared to provide Trump with a “substantial amount” of evidence once a protective order is issued.
Chutkan has said she may hold a hearing on the matter.
A Trump spokesperson on Saturday denied that the Friday post was related to the trial, saying instead that Trump was attacking people dubbed “Republicans in Name Only” or RINOs.
But Trump’s social media posts attacking both the case and Chutkan have escalated since prosecutors’ Friday court filing. He has said he will seek Chutkan’s recusal in the case, although his lawyers have yet to officially make such a request.
Chutkan has previously ruled against Trump in a civil lawsuit seeking to block White House records from a congressional investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters.
She also has strongly spoken out against the Capitol attack in criminal cases stemming from the riots. Prior court rulings are not enough to require a federal judge to step aside from a case.
Trump lawyer John Lauro has said he will seek to transfer the 2020 election case from Washington, D.C., to West Virginia. While criminal cases are sometimes tried in different locations than where they are brought in order to sit an impartial jury, others charged in the Capitol siege have failed in trying to have their criminal cases transferred out of the Washington federal trial court.
(Reporting by Jacqueline Thomsen; Editing by Scott Malone and Howard Goller)
————————————————–
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Donald Trump’s lawyers on Monday urged a Washington, D.C., federal judge to only restrict “genuinely sensitive materials” in the former president’s 2020 election case from being released to the public ahead of trial.
“In a trial about First Amendment rights, the government seeks to restrict First Amendment rights,” Trump’s attorneys said in court papers filed on Monday, referring to the right of free speech guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
Prosecutors on Friday had asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan for a protective order limiting how evidence from the trial may be handled. That filing pointed to a post from Trump on his Truth Social site that said, “IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!”
U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office said the post could suggest that Trump, front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, might intimidate witnesses by improperly disclosing confidential evidence received from prosecutors.
Protective orders are typically issued in criminal cases.
Monday’s court filing from Trump’s lawyers did not directly address the claims of potential witness intimidation by their client.
Trump on Thursday pleaded not guilty to federal charges that he orchestrated a plot to try to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democratic President Joe Biden. It was the third criminal case brought against Trump so far this year.
Trump at his arraignment on Thursday swore to not intimidate witnesses or communicate with them about the case without legal counsel present.
Under a process known as discovery, prosecutors must provide defendants with the evidence against them so they can prepare a defense. Prosecutors in their Friday filing said they are prepared to provide Trump with a “substantial amount” of evidence once a protective order is issued.
Chutkan has said she may hold a hearing on the matter.
A Trump spokesperson on Saturday denied that the Friday post was related to the trial, saying instead that Trump was attacking people dubbed “Republicans in Name Only” or RINOs.
But Trump’s social media posts attacking both the case and Chutkan have escalated since prosecutors’ Friday court filing. He has said he will seek Chutkan’s recusal in the case, although his lawyers have yet to officially make such a request.
Chutkan has previously ruled against Trump in a civil lawsuit seeking to block White House records from a congressional investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters. She also has strongly spoken out against the Capitol attack in criminal cases stemming from the riots. Prior court rulings are not enough to require a federal judge to step aside from a case.
Trump lawyer John Lauro has said he will seek to transfer the 2020 election case from Washington, D.C., to West Virginia. While criminal cases are sometimes tried in different locations than where they are brought in order to sit an impartial jury, others charged in the Capitol siege have failed in trying to have their criminal cases transferred out of the Washington federal trial court.
(Reporting by Jacqueline Thomsen; Editing by Scott Malone and Howard Goller)
———————————————————
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Lawyers for Donald Trump said on Monday a protective order sought by Special Counsel Jack Smith to limit the use of evidence in the 2020 election case would violate the former U.S. president’s First Amendment rights, according to a court filing.
(Reporting by Eric Beech)
This story will be updated.
Comments