Posted on 10/17/2023 12:10:27 PM PDT by bitt
At issue in the hearing on Monday is whether Judge Tanya S. Chutkan should impose a gag order on former President Donald J. Trump in the federal election subversion case.
Gag orders can forbid people to publicly discuss a case or aspects of it. In this dispute, Jack Smith, the special counsel, has asked Judge Chutkan to bar Mr. Trump from publicly making “disparaging and inflammatory or intimidating” public statements about witnesses, the District of Columbia jury pool, or the judge and prosecutors themselves.
Doing so would raise tricky First Amendment issues as Mr. Trump makes another bid for the White House in a campaign that is partly defined by the criminal cases against him — and in which one of his rivals for the Republican nomination, former Vice President Mike Pence, is also a potential witness.
There is not a lot of precedent to guide Judge Chutkan’s decision. Gag orders are more typically imposed on defense lawyers instead of defendants, who under normal circumstances tend not to talk publicly about their cases out of self-interest.
And gag orders are more typically about preventing the jury from being tainted by hearing about the case outside the courtroom, while Mr. Smith has focused on the risk that Mr. Trump’s attacks may inspire threats or violence against participants in the process.
Like any other judicial order, a gag order that is defied can be treated as a matter of contempt of court. To uphold the court’s authority and otherwise maintain order, judges can order contempt proceedings, which could result in a reprimand, fine or imprisonment.
How contempt proceedings work, however, is very complicated. There is no single rule that regulates what should happen, making it hard to say exactly how it would play out if Judge Chutkan were to impose such an
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Judge Chutkan Releases Official Gag Order on Trump and It’s Worse Than We Thought
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/10/judge-chutkan-releases-official-gag-order-trump-its/
It's unconstitutional.
Because you can’t let someone defend himself in a Soviet-style trial.
When I tried to access the article, it wanted me to log in. When I tried this the NYT said they wanted access to my photo and account. I decided no.
The way politically motivated gag orders work is there’s all kinds of “leaks” about what the prosecution has and how evil the defendant is. But the defendant can’t say anything, so this contaminates the jury pool. Personally, I’d rather Jello wrestle a starving alligator than try to gag President Trump.
I would love to see Trump whisper in his wife’s ear whatever he wanted about this case, and then have his wife repeat what he said!!
It is well known that a court has no enforcement power of itself. Of itself, a court cannot do anything if its order, especially if it is unconstitutional, is ignored. That’s what nullification is.
The executive branch of the local, state, or federal court must enforce the order. Wouldn’t it be nice if the commensurate executive branch simply ignored the unconstitutional order along with the the target of the order?
Nullification of unconstitutional court orders would be a nice thing to see.
Of course they are. That’s why they have been used for ages. No one has ever challenged them before. //sarcasm
A judge decides what is contempt in his own courtroom. He can apply sanctions/fines. This is rarely contested.
Have you guys ever been in a courtroom?
Actually, the SC has held that gag orders are constitutional if they are used to protect the impartiality of jurors, are limited in scope and will be effective. But if your jury pool is Democratic Party dominated how effective is PDJT going to be with them if he criticizes the legitimacy of the charges and those who are bringing the charges?
He can apply sanctions/fines.
The judge sits on a bench. He orders but cannot enforce. If the executive side doesn’t enforce, the order is nullified. Don’t you get that?
Good example was Lincoln’s ignoring the court order striking down his suspension of habeas corpus.
And yes, I’m in court a lot. But you don’t have to be in corut to know how our constitutional system and the separation of powers works.
How quickly can this be appealed?
You can't contaminate a jury pool that will already vote to convict him.
.
No. people have challenged gag orders before. The courts have not always ruled correctly. Do you believe the courts are always correct?
As I said the gag order is unconstitutional.
Address the specifics. Your first response was lacking.
CNN's reporting could affect the impartiality of the jurors.
You and I discussing the case could affect the impartiality of the jurors.
Do you think the judge has the constitutional right to issue a gag order against CNN or against you and I.
Nope but he can do it anyway, if he can do it to the President he can do it to anyone. However if you want to mutilate your child in violation of a court order, well then okay.
I seem to remember Hunter ignoring a Judge in Arkansas with out consequences.
No, I think free speech is just that. Nothing in the First Amendment that allows the Judicial Branch to carve out exceptions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.