Trump asks the full DC appeals court to review the silence order in the election case
Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump on Monday asked the full federal appeals court in Washington to consider whether a silence order in the criminal case accusing him of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election should be further limited or thrown out .
The request for a hearing Before the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Trump’s latest attempt was to challenge the order, which was imposed on him in October by the judge hearing the case in Federal District Court in Washington. Mr Trump’s lawyers asked the full court to suspend the silence order as it decided whether to hear his appeal.
Two weeks ago, a three-judge panel of the appeals court upheld the basic idea of limiting Trump’s public statements on the case, but limited the terms of the order in a handful of important ways. As part of the revisions, the panel gave the former president more leeway to comment on potential witnesses in the proceedings and to attack Jack Smith, the special prosecutor who oversaw the prosecution.
In its decision, the panel reached a key conclusion: that Mr. Trump’s comments did not have to pose a “clear and present danger” to anyone involved in the case, and that the gag order could be used as a preventive measure to prevent people from suffering harm.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers, in their request to the full court, specifically took issue with the panel’s ruling that the former president’s speech could be shortened even if his words could not be linked to any immediate threat.
“This petition presents a question of exceptional importance,” the lawyers wrote. “Whether a district court silences the leading candidate for president of the United States’ core political speech—ignoring the First Amendment rights of more than 100 million American voters—based on speculation about undefined potential future harm.”
In the filing, D. John Sauer, a lawyer who has handled appeals for Mr. Trump, argued that prosecutors had failed to present evidence that Mr. Trump’s public comments or social media posts had resulted in “any threats or intimidation” or that anyone subject to the gag order even felt “intimidated by President Trump’s speech.”
The revised order prohibited Mr. Trump from going after witnesses in the proceedings if his comments related to their participation in the case. It banned him from attacking members of Mr Smith’s staff or court employees involved in the case. It also protected the relatives of prosecutors or court staff.
If the full appeals court denies Trump’s request for a hearing or rejects his arguments after granting one, he could challenge the silence order at the Supreme Court, further entangling the justices in the election interference case.