|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By: Hal C Clarke
In a continuing legal drama, Donald Trump’s legal team has formally requested the extension of the pause on the gag order in his New York civil fraud trial. The lawyers assert that while the threats against the judge and his clerk are “vile,” they should not serve as grounds to curtail the former president’s right to free speech. Emphasizing the significance of allowing Trump to critique the court overseeing the historic non-jury trial, especially given his status as the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, the legal filing underscores the delicate balance between the right to free expression and the imperative to maintain a fair and secure legal process, NY Post reported.
This development follows a recent decision by a New York appellate judge who, earlier this month, temporarily lifted the gag order, expressing concerns about Trump’s right to free speech. The initial gag order, implemented by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron on October 3, prohibited Trump and his legal team from publicly commenting on the court’s staff. This decision came in response to Trump’s controversial post featuring a photo of Allison Greenfield, the chief law clerk, falsely labeling her as “Schumer’s girlfriend” and claiming she was overseeing the trial against him.
The essence of Trump’s appeal is twofold: it seeks to lift both the gag order and the $15,000 in fines levied against him by Engoron for twice violating the ruling by publicly commenting on Greenfield. At the heart of the legal dispute is the contention by Trump’s legal team that Greenfield has been effectively acting as a co-judge alongside Engoron, pointing to her physical proximity to the judge during the trial.
The legal wrangling has brought considerable attention to Greenfield and has taken a toll on her, as outlined in an affidavit filed by Court Officer Captain Charles Hollon. The affidavit revealed that Greenfield’s personal cellphone number and email address have been compromised due to daily doxing, resulting in a barrage of harassing comments, disparagement, and even antisemitic tropes. The threats against Justice Engoron and Greenfield are considered not just serious but also credible, leading to a staggering 20 to 30 daily calls and 30 to 50 social media messages.
Trump’s legal team, in response, contends that Greenfield willingly exposed herself to the media, being photographed, videotaped, and identified despite purported security concerns. They argue that, while the threats are undoubtedly reprehensible, they do not present a clear and present danger of imminent harm, and thus, should not impede Trump’s right to freely express himself. This intricate legal battle over the gag order unfolds against the backdrop of the ninth week of the trial in Manhattan Supreme Court.
In a noteworthy revelation during the proceedings, Trump’s lawyer, Chris Kise, disclosed that the former president would return to the stand as the final defense witness on December 11. Adding to the legal intricacies, Eric Trump, an executive vice president of the Trump Organization and a defendant in the case, is scheduled to testify for the second time on December 6. Despite the heightened drama in the courtroom, the New York Attorney General’s Office, responsible for prosecuting the case, opted to refrain from commenting on the recent filing. This protracted legal battle underscores the complex intersection of legal and political considerations in this high-profile case, with implications reaching far beyond the courtroom
