DC Federal Judge Puts Trump Gag Order On Hold Temporarily

Motion for Stay: “No Court in American history has imposed a gag order on a criminal defendant who is campaigning for public office—least of all, on the leading candidate for President of the United States. This Court’s Opinion and Order … is the first of its kind. Given its extraordinary nature, one would expect an extraordinary and compelling justification for the Gag Order. But that is conspicuously absent.”

Donald Trump is subject to a gag order in two cases. In the civil case in New York, Trump was just fined $5000 for not removing from a a post naming and attacking the Judge’s clerk, despite court order. Trump did remove it from Truth Social, but not the campaign site.

Trump also has a gag order in the DC federal court case, as we previously covered:

In order to safeguard the integrity of these proceedings, it is necessary to impose certain restrictions on public statements by interested parties. Undisputed testimony cited by the government demonstrates that when Defendant has publicly attacked individuals, including on matters related to this case, those individuals are consequently threatened and harassed. See ECF No. 57 at 3–5. Since his indictment, and even after the government filed the instant motion, Defendant has continued to make similar statements attacking individuals involved in the judicial process, including potential witnesses, prosecutors, and court staff. See id. at 6–12. Defendant has made those statements to national audiences using language communicating not merely that he believes the process to be illegitimate, but also that particular individuals involved in it are liars, or “thugs,” or deserve death. Id.; ECF No. 64 at 9–10. The court finds that such statements pose a significant and immediate risk that (1) witnesses will be intimidated or otherwise unduly influenced by the prospect of being themselves targeted for harassment or threats; and (2) attorneys, public servants, and other court staff will themselves become targets for threats and harassment. And that risk is largely irreversible in the age of the Internet; once an individual is publicly targeted, even revoking the offending statement may not abate the subsequent threats, harassment, or other intimidating effects during the pretrial as well as trial stages of this case.

Trump filed a motion for a stay pending appeal with the district court judge earlier today, and the judge has granted a stay until further hearing next week.