So what do you think happens in the U.S. if a judge’s “gag” order is breached by a journalist? The order was not exclusively applied to him. It was given for a good reason. Negative publicity about a trial can result in a request for a mistrial. Which if granted means the prosecution has to request a new trial. That takes time and money. And likely could mean the parties being acquitted. Not to mention speedy trial and all that.
Britain like the U.S. grants the defendants the presumption of innocence. We might not like it when it seems to mean the obviously guilty have more rights than you or I. But we would like to a good sight less if that presumption was flexible and not a fast rule.
“So what do you think happens in the U.S. if a judge’s “gag” order is breached by a journalist?”
Not much because in the US such orders are only lawful when applied to the participants in a specific case. They don’t apply to reporters at all.