Judge Limits Trump’s Speech, Here’s What She Said About The First Amendment

It has been confirmed by the judge that during the trial, Trump’s speech will be limited to ensure the safety of the witnesses. The judge, who is known for being strict when it comes to sentencing defendants involved in the January 6 riot, has restricted the amount of information that Trump can share. This comes as prosecutors advocate for a trial date in January 2024.

The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s legal case, which involves accusations of attempting to overturn Joe Biden’s win in the election, has stated that although the First Amendment grants all Americans the right to free speech, it is not an absolute right. The judge emphasized that even statements made during Trump’s campaign must yield to safeguarding the integrity of the judicial process.

At the first hearing of Trump’s federal case in Washington, Judge Tanya S. Chutkan stated that her decisions would not be influenced by the fact that Trump is running a political campaign. She stressed that the orderly administration of justice takes precedence over campaign considerations. “If that means he can’t say exactly what he wants to say about witnesses in this case,” then that is what is going to happen, Chutkan stated. She consistently cautioned the former president and his defense team about the boundaries on what he could potentially disclose regarding government evidence in the case. Chutkan pointed out that any statements made online by Trump must always consider the safety and security of witnesses.

Following the 90-minute hearing, the judge warned Trump and his legal counsel to exercise caution in their public statements regarding the case. She underscored her commitment to employing any necessary measures to preserve the integrity of the legal proceedings.

Chutkan’s admonitions serve as an early benchmark in the case. They coincided with her resolution of a dispute between the opposing sides concerning a protective order to expedite the prosecution’s release of materials and the court’s establishment of a trial date. Special counsel Jack Smith’s team proposed January 2 as the trial date.

During the hearing, Chutkan turned down the government’s request for a broad protective order to restrict sharing of all evidence disclosed in the case. Nonetheless, she largely aligned with the prosecutors, granting them the flexibility to define “sensitive” materials subject to heightened safeguards. Chutkan also noted that Trump’s defense had previously accepted similar conditions in his ongoing special counsel prosecution in Florida, where he faces charges related to mishandling classified documents and obstruction.

The concern expressed is that in the midst of heated debates or a spirited campaign, a statement could be made that later intersects with information discovered during the case. Defense attorney John Lauro highlighted this risk, stating prosecutors might flag such instances as relevant to the evidence.

This hearing provided insights into how Chutkan will navigate this politically charged case throughout the presidential election year leading up to 2024. Since Trump’s indictment on August 1, the two sides have engaged in a legal duel over defense demands that the judge uphold Trump’s First Amendment and due process rights. The prosecution has also clashed with the defense regarding the court’s responsibility to uphold the integrity of the government’s investigation, the public’s interest in a swift trial, and the necessity for an unbiased jury pool due to pretrial publicity.

Chutkan has signaled her intention to set a trial date during the next hearing scheduled for August 28. Prosecutors have requested that she first issue the protective order and then allow Trump to seek modifications later.