Federal prosecutors are seeking a silence order against Trump

Prosecutors on Tuesday asked a federal appeals court in Washington to approve a silence order imposed on former President Donald J. Trump in the federal case accusing him of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. history” of targeting his opponents on social media has often led to dangers in the real world.

The gag order against Mr. Trump was suspended this month by the appeals court as it considers whether the judge in the case, Tanya S. Chutkan, was right to impose it in the first place. The appeals court will hear oral arguments on the order next week.

In a file of 67 pagesCecil Vandevender, an assistant to Jack Smith, the special counsel who led the former president’s federal prosecutions, told the appeals court that Trump had received several warnings to curb his aggressive public statements. Yet, Mr. Vandevender wrote, the former president has persistently tried to “insult” Mr. Smith and his family, and “target specific witnesses with attacks on their character and credibility.”

Mr. Trump’s attacks on those involved in the election interference case were “part of a pattern going back years in which people publicly targeted by the defendant have suffered intimidation, threats and intimidation,” Mr. Trump said. Vandevender wrote.

His argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was one of the final steps in the long-running battle over the gag order. It was introduced last month to prevent Trump from targeting prosecutors, witnesses or other court officials involved in the case in Federal District Court in Washington.

Judge Chutkan briefly paused the order nearly four weeks ago to discuss some issues related to the appeal, but then reinstated it at Mr. Smith’s request after Mr. Trump continued to violate its provisions.

Not long after, the appeals court itself temporarily suspended the order as it ruled on whether it had been properly issued in the first place. The battle between Mr. Trump’s lawyers and Mr. Smith’s prosecutors is expected to come to a head on Monday when the court hears oral arguments from both sides on the order’s validity.

In his filing on Tuesday, Mr. Vandevender pointed out that Judge Chutkan had warned Mr. Trump about his public statements as early as August, not long after his indictment in the case was filed. At a hearing in Washington, the judge acknowledged that the former president would have “all the rights that any citizen would have,” but also noted that she would not tolerate “a carnival atmosphere of unchecked publicity and trial by the media.”

Despite such warnings, Mr. Vandevender told the appeals court, Mr. Trump launched a barrage of attacks on people involved in the case. The former president repeatedly called Mr. Smith and his team “thugs” and “crazies,” and lashed out at Judge Chutkan himself as a “fraud.”

Mr. Trump called former Vice President Mike Pence, a possible trial witness, “delusional.” He also posted a message online, Mr. Vandevender noted, saying that Gen. Mark A. Milley, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and another potential witness to the trial, had done something “so egregious that in days gone by times the The punishment would have been DEATH!”

Mr. Trump’s comments have sometimes had real-world consequences, Mr. Vandevender told the appeals court.

He noted that when the former president posted a message online that read, “If you come after me, I’ll come after you!” Shortly after his indictment, a Texas woman left a voicemail message for Judge Chutkan threatening to kill her. (The woman was later arrested.)

He also pointed out that after Mr. Trump posted former President Barack Obama’s speech on social media, a Navy veteran who saw the post went to the neighborhood armed with guns and ammunition. (He was also arrested.)

Since the silence order was imposed, Mr. Trump has maintained that it has trampled on his First Amendment rights and prevented him from publicly criticizing the election interference case as he runs for president again as an example of political persecution.

But, as Mr. Vandevender told the appeals court, the order was in fact narrowly tailored and expressly allowed Mr. Trump to attack President Biden or his administration, and to attack the election prosecution as political.

“The order leaves the defendant free to do virtually anything he alleged at trial that he must be able to do in order to run for office while defending himself in court,” Mr. Vandevender wrote.