2023-11-17 17:51:00
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey is speaking out against “improper motives” behind Donald Trump’s gag order in his Washington criminal trial, days before an appeals court is set to consider the former president’s challenge.
Morrisey filed an amicus brief joined by 18 Republican-led states this week and called for a panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to strike down the gag order imposed on Trump in the criminal case alleging he conspired to overturn his 2020 election defeat. West Virginia’s attorney general told the Washington Examiner that “it’s important for the court to draw a line and not have a chilling effect against the next Republican nominee for president.”
BIDEN STOKES NEWSOM PRESIDENTIAL BUZZ AT APEC EVENT ALONGSIDE CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR
President Trump adjusts the microphone for West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey during a rally.
(Craig Hudson/Charleston Gazette-Mail via AP)
“All of these efforts have been borne by really, I think, improper motives,” Morrisey said. “The best way to address it is to eliminate the gag order [and] have something very narrow in place. I think it’s really important that there’s a focus on the chilling aspect of the speech and that folks push back on that.”
Special counsel Jack Smith requested a gag order in September, aiming to rein in Trump’s verbal attacks against prosecutors like himself, court staff, and potential witnesses involved in the case. Following the courtroom arguments on Oct. 16, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan largely sided with Smith by imposing the gag order on Trump, who has since appealed, and the D.C. Court of Appeals has temporarily paused the order.
The brief, co-led by Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird, argues Chutkan “overstepped” her role by blocking Trump from making public statements about “individuals involved in the judicial process.”
“The court imposed ‘limited restrictions on extrajudicial statements’ that hinder and inhibit the ongoing presidential campaign, particularly as applied to limiting President Trump’s ability to make statements about witnesses who are themselves part of that campaign,” according to page 6 of the brief.
“Beyond its overbreadth, the Order is impermissibly vague. By failing to articulate what it means to ‘target’ the individuals the Order identifies, the Court’s prior restraint will unlawfully chill President Trump’s speech,” the brief read.
Prosecutors and attorneys for former President Donald Trump are slated to convene Aug. 28 for a hearing where U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan may set a trial date for his federal criminal case over alleged attempts to subvert the 2020 election.
(AP Photos)
Smith has argued that while the 2024 GOP front-runner was within his First Amendment rights to claim innocence, allege the prosecution was politically motivated, and criticize the Justice Department and President Joe Biden, there was a “need to safeguard the integrity of the proceedings, including by protecting certain trial participants from intimidation, harassment, and threats.”
Morrisey said that “no one would object to appropriate protections” in the case but contended “there’s not been evidence that individuals are being targeted.”
“This has to be done in a way that, at its core, protects free speech and political speech and activity,” Morrisey said.
Smith has cited Trump’s social media posts as fuel for his argument in favor of a gag order, including various screenshots from his Truth Social account, including one in which the former president said“IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU.”
Less than a week after imposing the gag order, Chutkan issued a brief pause on Oct. 20 after Trump appealed to the District of Columbia Circuit, giving Smith’s team time to respond to Trump’s continued opposition. She put the order back in place on Oct. 30, rejecting claims that the order was unclear in a nine-page opinion.
The federal appeals court in the District of Columbia temporarily paused the gag order again on Nov. 3 in response to Trump’s appeal, giving Trump some relief until arguments in the dispute on Monday.
The appeal will be decided after Monday morning oral arguments by a panel on the District of Columbia Circuit of three judges who were all appointed by Democratic presidents. The three judges include Patricia Millett and Cornelia Pillard, who were appointed by President Barack Obama, along with Bradley Garcia, who was appointed by President Joe Biden.
Trump has vowed to take his fight to the Supreme Court if the appeals court rules against him. The criminal case is headed for a trial on March 4, just before Super Tuesday, a high-stakes day of primary voting to determine who will become the Republican nominee for president in the race against Biden. Trump has pleaded not guilty to the four-count indictment levied by Smith in Washington.
“I think a lot of these issues ultimately have the potential to go up to the high court, and we’re going to continue to stand and press for free speech because President Trump deserves that opportunity,” Morrisey said.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Alabama, Alaska, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, and Utah joined the Iowa- and West Virginia-led brief.
Read the 23-page amicus brief here:
1700245652
#West #Virginia #attorney #general #decries #improper #motives #Trumps #gag #order