On Monday, October 16, 2023, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan agreed to impose certain limitations on former President Donald Trump’s public statements regarding his election interference case pending in the District of Columbia court.  These restrictions prohibit the former president and his legal team from making inflammatory remarks targeting Special Counsel Jack Smith, his staff, court personnel, and potential witnesses who may testify in the proceedings.

This decision by Judge Chutkan came after an extensive hearing in a federal court in Washington, D.C., following a request from Smith and his legal team to limit Trump’s public comments about the case brought against him by the Justice Department.  You can read the original motion HERE:

Docket # 23-CR-00257 – Document # 57 – Government’s Opposed Motion to Ensure that Extrajudicial Statements Do Not Prejudice These Proceedings

Judge Chutkan issued a mixed ruling, granting the Justice Department’s request for limitations on specific statements by Trump that she deemed could jeopardize the trial. She emphasized that the objective was to prevent language that posed a threat to the proper administration of justice, rather than assessing personal preferences for Trump’s language.  Trump promptly announced on Truth Social that he would be appealing the decision.

However, Judge Chutkan denied Smith’s request to prevent the president from making statements about the District of Columbia, where the trial is scheduled for March 2024, as well as criticizing the Biden administration or the Justice Department. Trump has accused the special counsel of pursuing a politically motivated prosecution aimed at harming his 2024 presidential campaign against President Biden.

Chutkan stressed that First Amendment protections should not compromise the administration of justice and the protection of witnesses. A spokesperson for Trump expressed strong disapproval of the decision, characterizing it as partisan and detrimental to democracy. They declared Trump’s commitment to defending the Constitution, the rights of the American people, and preserving the country’s freedom from what they perceived as weaponized law enforcement.

The court hearing was marked by contentious exchanges, where allegations of threats and political censorship were raised. Attorneys and Judge Chutkan grappled with the consequences of limiting Trump’s public statements versus keeping the current conditions of his pretrial release.

Prosecutors had requested Chutkan to issue a “narrowly tailored” order to prevent Trump from making statements that could seriously prejudice the case, citing numerous tweets and public remarks that they argued targeted those who opposed him and could harm the fair trial process.

In contrast, Trump’s legal team opposed the request, asserting that it would infringe upon his right to free speech and hinder his ability to campaign, given the close connection between the criminal prosecution and political campaign. They alleged that the move was aimed at silencing the former president and accused it of being politically motivated.

Judge Chutkan reminded everyone that as a criminal defendant facing four felony charges, Trump did not have the right to say and do as he pleased. She worked through the proposed gag order, discussing definitions and the breadth of the restrictions sought by Smith’s team. The prosecution clarified that they had no interest in preventing Trump from running for office or defending his reputation.

Ultimately, Judge Chutkan’s ruling aimed to restrict any witness intimidation and emphasized that Trump’s presidential candidacy did not grant him unrestricted freedom to vilify prosecutors and others involved in the case. She warned that any violation of the new order by the parties involved would result in unspecified sanctions.

Shortly before Judge Chutkan’s decision, the former president’s campaign issued a fundraising email characterizing the proposed gag order as an attempt to silence the American people.

Trump has been indicted by a Federal grand jury on four charges related to his alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election results and has pleaded not guilty. The trial is scheduled for March 2024, coinciding with the start of the presidential primary elections.

The case is Docket # 1:23-cr-00257-TSC-1, pending in the United States District Court, District of Columbia.