Trump Fights Proposed Gag Order Full of Holes

WASHINGTON - Sept. 26, 2023 - PRLog -- Lawyers for Trump have strongly opposed a proposed gag order which they claim is an attempt to "muzzle" him during his campaign in violation of his "First Amendment freedoms."

But even if U.S. Judge Tanya Chutkan grants without any changes the motion by special counsel Jack Smith seeking what has been described as a narrowly tailored gag order, it will still contain a hole big enough to drive a truck through, and there may be nothing the court can do about it, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf.

Thus, even if Trump himself does not defy the proposed order, many of his supporters - including members of Congress, talk show hosts, members of PACs, and other organizations - can still do exactly what is prohibited by the order.

Moreover, there is nothing in the order which would prevent Trump himself from imploring those who believe in him and in his innocence from doing exactly what the order is designed to prohibit.

Members of Congress who have spoken out on behalf of Trump, including making statements which many consider inflammatory as well as false or misleading, would be almost impossible for the court to muzzle, says Banzhaf, given the separation of powers and the protection afforded to speech by U.S. representatives and senators.

Also, well financed political action committees (PACs), groups such as the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers, as well as numerous individual talk show hosts, podcasters, and other "influencers" who collectively reach and influence tens of millions of people are not parties to the proceeding, and therefore would not limited in any way by the proposed limited gag order.

Moreover, if statements about the case, witnesses, etc. are made by any one or more of Trump's supporters in Congress, they will in addition be completely protected by Section 6 of ARTICLE I which provides that "for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."

Professor Banzhaf filed the formal legal complaint which led to the investigation and indictment of Trump in Georgia.

Therefore, he notes that he, like virtually every other American, would still be free to talk about or otherwise inform others about the identity, testimony, or credibility of prospective witnesses, and/or to make statements about any party, witness, attorney, court personnel, or potential jurors that are disparaging and inflammatory or intimidating, or in the alternative are praiseworthy, supportive, or consoling.

http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com   @profbanzhaf