Trump loses another attempt to throw out hush money trial gag order
Threats to prosecutors and court staff have ‘continued to pose a significant and imminent threat,’ appeals court rules
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Donald Trump has lost yet another attempt to throw out a gag order in his hush money case in New York.
A panel of appeals court judges on Thursday rejected the former president’s argument that the gag order should be entirely lifted after his conviction. The five judges on the midlevel state appeals court sided with New York Justice Juan Merchan, who extended protections for prosecutors and court staff through Trump’s sentencing.
A gag order intended to stop Trump’s public attacks — which have fueled threats and harassment aimed at trial witnesses, judges and prosecutors — should partially remain in place to allow Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and court staff “to perform their lawful duties free from threats, intimidation, harassment, and harm” until sentencing, the judges wrote.
The district attorney’s office successfully argued that harassing messages have “continued to pose a significant and imminent threat” even after the jury’s 34-count guilty verdict in May, according to the appeals court judges.
“We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing,” they wrote.
The former president is scheduled to be sentencing on September 18, after his attorneys pressed for delays to make their case that the verdict should be thrown out under the terms of a landmark Supreme Court ruling that grants the president “immunity” from criminal prosecution for “official” actions performed in office.
Manhattan prosecutors have urged Judge Merchan to reject that argument.
Trump has repeatedly used his Truth Social account to rage against witnesses, judges and prosecutors, which have fueled harassing and threatening messages aimed at attorneys, court staff and their families, according to law enforcement filings in several cases against him.
New York City Police Department investigators logged dozens of “actionable threats” against the district attorney, his family and staff since Trump was indicted, including 56 that were made in April, May and June of this year, according to court filings.
On May 30, a jury found Trump guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records connected with an election interference scheme that involved buying the silence of adult film star Stormy Daniels.
Last month, with the verdict rendered and the jury discharged, and without opposition from Manhattan prosecutors, Judge Merchan agreed to lift a portion of the gag order intended to protect trial witnesses like Daniels and Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen.
The judge also agreed to lift protections for jurors, though he said it is his “strong preference” to keep them in place.
During the hush money trial, Trump was fined $10,000 for 10 statements violating the gag order, and Judge Merchan threatened him with jail if he continued to violate the terms of the order.
“The magnitude of such a decision is not lost on me,” Merchan told Trump from inside the courtroom in May.
“But at the end of the day I have a job to do, and part of that job is to protect the dignity of the justice system,” he said. “Your continued violations … threaten to interfere with the administration of justice, and constitute a direct attack on the rule of law.”