Trump’s lawyers say Jack Smith’s proposed protection order in an election conspiracy would violate his right to free speech — accusing Biden of ‘throwing shade’ over the charge
Donald Trump’s legal team has argued that a proposed protection order to prevent him from releasing evidence in his election conspiracy case is “exaggerated” and should be changed.
In a lawsuit Monday, attorneys for the former president argued that the restrictions proposed by Special Counsel Jack Smith would violate Trump’s free speech under the First Amendment to the Constitution.
“In a lawsuit over First Amendment rights, the government is seeking to limit First Amendment rights,” Trump attorney John Lauro wrote in the filing, anticipating an argument expected from defense attorneys during the process.
Prosecutors had asked Judge Tanya Chutkan, who will lead the case in DC, for a protection order Friday after Trump posted, “If you go after me, I’ll come after you!
” on Truth Social.
Trump’s motion argued that while the proposed injunction would prohibit him from publishing government evidence handed over during the discovery process, his political opponents, including President Joe Biden, had “benefited” from the indictment.
Donald Trump’s legal team has argued that a proposed protection order to prevent him from disclosing evidence in his election conspiracy case is ‘exaggerated’
Trump’s lawyers called this Biden tweet a “thinly veiled reference to his administration’s prosecution of President Trump just hours before the arraignment”
Trump’s lawyers called in an Aug. 3 tweet from Biden that showed the Democrat sipping a mug of coffee, a “thinly veiled reference to his administration’s prosecution of President Trump just hours before the arraignment.”
The tweet showed Biden saying, “I like my coffee dark” while sipping from a mug printed with the “Dark Brandon” meme, a tongue-in-cheek depiction of Biden as a ruthless despot with lasers shooting from his eyes.
Trump’s application quoted a Insider article speculating that Biden “appeared to be casting a big shadow” at Trump with a coffee-sipping video. Biden has repeatedly declined to comment on the charges against Trump.
In a post on his Truth Social site, Trump also lashed out at the proposed restrictions, writing, “I shouldn’t be getting a protection order because it would affect my right to FREEDOM OF OPINION.”
“Crazy Jack Smith and the Department of Injustice should be doing that, because they’re ‘leaking’ illegally in all directions!” he added in reference to the special counsel who brought the case against him.
The debate came in the federal criminal case accusing Trump of attempting to reverse his loss in the 2020 presidential election, one of three criminal charges the former president now faces.
Prosecutors have said a protective order — not uncommon in criminal cases — is especially important in Trump’s case because of his penchant for using social media.
They have expressed concern that Trump could inappropriately share sensitive case information online, which could have a “damaging chilling effect on witnesses.”
In a lawsuit Monday, lawyers for the former president argued that the restrictions proposed by Special Counsel Jack Smith (above) would violate Trump’s free speech rights.
In their Friday filing for the injunction, prosecutors included a screenshot of this message
In a post on his Truth Social site, Trump also lashed out at the proposed restrictions
Trump’s lawyers argued that the judge should issue a more limited injunction that would prohibit only the public release of material deemed “sensitive” — such as grand jury documents — rather than all evidence that the government has the case has been handed over.
In their Friday filing for the injunction, prosecutors included a screenshot of a post from Trump’s Truth Social platform that same day in which he wrote in all caps, “If you go after me, I’ll come after you!”
Trump’s lawyers said citing that post to argue that there is a danger that Trump would publish information about the grand jury was “perhaps a provocative claim when searching for headlines, but one that falters under minimal scrutiny.”
The former president’s legal team said his position was “general political speech” and had nothing to do with the case.
A Trump spokesman said last week that the “come after you” post was in response to “unfair interest groups and Super PACs.”
Trump’s lawyers said in Monday’s filing that the need to protect sensitive information on the case “does not require a blanket order over all documents produced by the government.”
The defense filing was in response to Smith’s team’s request Friday for the protection order, which would impose rules on what Trump and his defense team can do with evidence handed over by the administration as they prepare for trial in the case that last week was unlocked.
Trump’s lawyers had asked for an additional three days on Saturday to respond to prosecutors’ request for the protection order, saying they needed more time for discussion. But judge Tanya Chutkan quickly denied that request.
The injunction proposed by prosecutors seeks to prevent Trump and his lawyers from disclosing government-provided material to anyone other than people on his legal team, potential witnesses, the witnesses’ attorneys, or others approved by the court.
It would put tighter limits on “sensitive material,” which prosecutors said includes grand jury testimony and material obtained through sealed search warrants.
Prosecutors said they are willing to hand over a significant amount of evidence to Trump’s legal team, much of which contains sensitive and confidential information.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing in the case, as well as another federal case filed by Smith accusing him of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida.
He has characterized all the cases against him as an attempt to bring down his 2024 campaign.
His legal team has indicated it will argue that in 2020 he had relied on the advice of lawyers around him and that Trump had a right to challenge an election he believed was stolen.
Trump pleaded not guilty to four felonies last week, including conspiracy to defraud the US and conspiracy to obstruct Congressional certification of Biden’s election victory.
The charges could lead to a long prison sentence if convicted, with the most serious charges reaching up to 20 years.
It is the third criminal case filed this year against the early front-runner in the 2024 Republican presidential primary.
But it is the first case to try to hold him accountable for his attempts to stay in power during the chaotic weeks between his election loss and his supporters’ attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Smith also charged Trump with dozens of felonies in June, alleging that the former president illegally kept classified documents after he left the White House and hindered the administration’s efforts to recover them.
A new indictment recently unsealed in that case accuses Trump of collaborating with Mar-a-Lago staffers to try to remove security footage that investigators searched for.
Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart imposed a similar protection order in June that prohibits Trump and his legal team from disclosing evidence handed to them by prosecutors without prior authorization.
Prosecutors are seeking another protection order in that case with more rules about the defense team’s handling of classified evidence.