He can’t, SCOTUS has upheld gag orders but only in a limited context. That being when a criminal defendant’s 6th Amendment right to a fair trial is jeopardized. There is no trial here, the sexual assault perps have plead out. So a gag order is unocnstitutional in this case.
More to the point though is that in Kentucky the law says a victim must be consulted on plea bargains and that the victim also has a “right” to a victims statement. I know of no exceptions for juveniles but I’m just pretending to be trained in the law here.
There is no trial here, the sexual assault perps have plead out. So a gag order is unocnstitutional in this case.
The perps haven't been sentenced yet. Maybe that's it. Anyway, it seems she did a bit of research on the subject before she decided to release their name. Here's the article from the Courier Journal,
Assault victim's tweets prompt contempt case
The Courier Journal is working with her attorneys in trying to get the contempt hearing made public, which is legal in Kentucky. There is a hearing on July 30 to decide if it actually will be public.
My suggestion to the judge is not to pick an argument with an entity that buys ink by the barrel.