Trump’s Gag Order Reinstated in D.C.

A federal judge on Sunday reinstated the gag order in Donald Trump's election interference case, agreeing with Special Counsel Jack Smith that the former president should remain muzzled when talking about certain people involved in his upcoming criminal trial even as he tries to appeal the speech restrictions.

U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan's nine-page opinion said she was denying Trump's motion for a long-term stay of the original gag order and that she was lifting the temporarily stay she's previously agreed to because she does not think the GOP's 2024 front-runner had "made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits."

"As the court has explained, the First Amendment rights of participants in criminal proceedings must yield, when necessary, to the orderly administration of justice—a principle reflected in Supreme Court precedent, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the Local Criminal Rules," Chutkan wrote.

The judge in her decision referenced a couple of recent Trump public statements made since she had suspended the gag order, noting the differences between one which would have been a violation and one which wouldn't.

First, Chutkan highlighted an Oct. 20 Truth Social post from Trump that she said did not violate her order because it did not target certain individuals.

That message read: "Does anyone notice that the Election Rigging Biden Administration never goes the Riggers, but only after those that want to catch and expose the Rigging dogs. Massive information and 100% evidence will be made available during the Corrupt Trials started by our Political Opponent. We will never let 2020 happen again. Look at the result, OUR COUNTRY IS BEING DESTROYED. MAGA!!!"

By contrast, the judge cited Trump's Oct. 24 post on Truth Social that would "almost certainly violate the Order under any reasonable definition of 'targeting.'"

The message was about Mark Meadows, sent in response to an ABC News report that the former White House chief of staff had spoken at least three times with the special counsel's office, including once with immunity before a federal grand jury.

It read: "I don’t think Mark Meadows would lie about the Rigged and Stollen 2020 Presidential Election merely for getting IMMUNITY against Prosecution (PERSECUTION!) by Deranged Prosecutor, Jack Smith. BUT, when you really think about it, after being hounded like a dog for three years, told you’ll be going to jail for the rest of your life, your money and your family will be forever gone, and we’re not at all interested in exposing those that did the RIGGING — If you say BAD THINGS about that terrible “MONSTER,” DONALD J. TRUMP, we won’t put you in prison, you can keep your family and your wealth, and, perhaps, if you can make up some really horrible “STUFF” a out him, we may very well erect a statue of you in the middle of our decaying and now very violent Capital, Washington, D.C. Some people would make that deal, but they are weaklings and cowards, and so bad for the future our Failing Nation. I don’t think that Mark Meadows is one of them, but who really knows? MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!"

Trump's lawyers in their own legal brief had conceded the Meadows post probably had crossed the line, which Chutkan wrote was a recognition "for good reason."

"The statement singles out a foreseeable witness for purposes of characterizing his potentially unfavorable testimony as a 'lie' 'mad[e] up' to secure immunity, and it attacks him as a 'weakling[] and coward[]' if he provides that unfavorable testimony — an attack that could readily be interpreted as an attempt to influence or prevent the witness’s participation in this case."

She added: "The plain distinctions between this statement and the prior one—apparent to the court and both parties—demonstrate that far from being arbitrary or standardless, the Order’s prohibition on 'targeting' statements can be straightforwardly understood and applied."

Chutkan's original gag order said no one involved in the upcoming trial can make statements targeting prosecutors or their staff, defense lawyers or their staff, court staff and supporting personnel, and "any reasonably foreseeable witnesses or the substance of their testimony."

Trump immediately filed a notice of appeal when Chutkan issued the gag order, though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has yet to schedule briefings or any kind of arguments tied to his request.

The special counsel's prosecutors in its filings had also made sure Chutkan was aware Trump had been fined twice — for a total of $15,000 — for violating a separate gag order that prohibits him from talking about New York State Supreme Court staffers involved in his civil fraud trial.

Trump's lawyers filed their response late Saturday pleading with Chutkan that the former president "has a right to speak his mind and the public has a right to hear what he has to say."

But the judge, an appointee of President Barack Obama who herself has come under direct attack from Trump, decided in less than 24 hours that the gag order she'd first imposed on Oct. 17 should go back into place.

Her ruling released Sunday also addressed Trump's complaint that the gag order is too vague, making it difficult to glean whether someone is a potential witness or if his statements about innocence veer into attacks on prosecutors or witnesses.

"If a party or their counsel makes a statement that may have violated the Order, the court will assess its substance and context," Chutkan wrote. "The fact that it needs to do so with special care in close cases does not render the underlying Order unconstitutionally vague."

The former president has pleaded not guilty to all charges in the Washington, D.C. case, which centers around four felony allegations he tried to overturn the 2020 election he lost. The former president is scheduled to go on trial beginning March 4, 2024.