Current:Home > MarketsProposed protective order would infringe on Trump's free speech, his lawyers say-LoTradeCoin
Proposed protective order would infringe on Trump's free speech, his lawyers say
View Date:2024-12-24 00:12:24
Former President Donald Trump's legal team says that a protective order proposed by special counsel Jack Smith would infringe on Trump's right to free speech.
Trump's attorneys made the argument in their response Monday to the special counsel's motion for a protective order over the discovery evidence in the case against Trump for allegedly seeking to overturn the 2020 election.
Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges of undertaking a "criminal scheme" to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called "fake electors" targeting several states; using the Justice Department to conduct "sham election crime investigations"; and trying to enlist the vice president to "alter the election results" -- all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in power.
MORE: Special counsel alerts court to Trump’s social media post
The former president has denied all wrongdoing and has dismissed the probe as politically motivated.
Monday's filing argues for narrower limits on the protective order, which Trump's attorneys say would protect sensitive materials while ensuring Trump's right to free speech.
"In a trial about First Amendment rights, the government seeks to restrict First Amendment rights," Trump's attorneys wrote in their filing. "Worse, it does so against its administration's primary political opponent, during an election season in which the administration, prominent party members, and media allies have campaigned on the indictment and proliferated its false allegations."
Smith's indictment against Trump, unsealed last week, disputes that he is being charged for exercising his First Amendment rights, instead alleging that he perpetrated three criminal conspiracies as "unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results."
Smith asked the judge for the protective order on Friday, referencing a social media post Trump made Friday afternoon in which he said, "IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I'M COMING AFTER YOU!"
In a statement issued after Smith's filing on Friday, the Trump campaign said the post was aimed at political interest groups.
"The Truth post cited is the definition of political speech," a Trump spokesperson said in a statement.
The proposed protective order submitted by Smith does not seek to bar Trump from commenting on the case in its entirety, but would restrict Trump and his attorneys from disclosing evidence such as materials returned from grand jury subpoenas and testimony from witnesses and other exhibits shown to the grand jury. It does not limit Trump from discussing materials that were already available to the public separate from the government's investigation.
Smith's attorneys have said the proposed order is largely modeled after similar protective orders issued in other cases.
But in their filing on Monday, Trump's attorneys accuse Smith's team of asking Judge Tanya Chutkan to "assume the role of censor and impose content-based regulations on President Trump's political speech that would forbid him from publicly discussing or disclosing all non-public documents produced by the government, including both purportedly sensitive materials, and non-sensitive, potentially exculpatory documents."
MORE: Judge in Trump's Jan. 6 case gives attorneys 2 weeks to propose trial date
Trump "does not contest the government's claimed interest in restricting some of the documents it must produce" such as grand jury related materials -- but "the need to protect that information does not require a blanket gag order over all documents produced by the government," the filing says.
Judge Chutkan said in an order on Saturday that she would "determine whether to schedule a hearing to discuss the proposed protective order after reviewing Defendant's response."
veryGood! (65319)
Related
- Nicole Kidman Reveals the Surprising Reason for Starring in NSFW Movie Babygirl
- Illegal crossings at U.S.-Mexico border fall to 3-year low, the lowest level under Biden
- Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Monkey in the Middle
- Cristiano Ronaldo Sobs at 2024 Euros After Missing Penalty Kick for Portugal—but Storms Back to Score
- Why Cynthia Erivo Needed Prosthetic Ears for Wicked
- Nevada verifies enough signatures to put constitutional amendment for abortion rights on ballot
- Restricted view seat at Taylor Swift's Eras Tour offers behind-the-scenes perk
- Former Raiders coach Jon Gruden loses bid for state high court reconsideration in NFL emails lawsuit
- 'Gladiator 2' review: Yes, we are entertained again by outrageous sequel
- Some Gen Xers can start dipping into retirement savings without penalty, but should you?
Ranking
- AP Top 25: Oregon remains No. 1 as Big Ten grabs 4 of top 5 spots; Georgia, Miami out of top 10
- Where Is Desperate Housewives' Orson Hodge Now? Kyle MacLachlan Says…
- Campus carry weapons law debuts in West Virginia, joins 11 other states
- US Olympic track and field trials: Winners and losers from final 4 days
- Top Federal Reserve official defends central bank’s independence in wake of Trump win
- California to bake under 'pretty intense' heat wave this week
- How to keep guns off Bourbon Street? Designate a police station as a school
- Horoscopes Today, June 30, 2024
Recommendation
-
GM recalling big pickups and SUVs because the rear wheels can lock up, increasing risk of a crash
-
Stingray that got pregnant despite no male companion has died, aquarium says
-
Police officer fatally shoots man at homeless shelter in northwest Minnesota city of Crookston
-
Why Fans Are Convinced Travis Kelce Surprised Taylor Swift at Her Dublin Show
-
Georgia House Republicans stick with leadership team for the next two years
-
Jamie Foxx Shares Scary Details About Being Gone for 20 Days Amid Health Crisis
-
6 people killed in Wisconsin house fire
-
Federal judge halts Mississippi law requiring age verification for websites