CNN
—
The New York judge has just joined a long list of judicial colleagues, government officials and campaign staffers who have attempted the impossible: reining in Donald Trump.
Judge Juan Melchán late Monday issued a gag order against the former president ahead of a hush money trial that begins in two weeks, following President Trump’s intense social media attacks on the case, prosecutors, the judicial system, and even the judge’s daughter. Expanded.
The judge warned that Trump’s actions posed a threat to those involved in the case and amounted to an attack on the rule of law.
“It is no longer just a possibility or a reasonable possibility that a threat to the integrity of the judicial process exists. The threat is very real. Warning alone is not enough, nor is resorting to restraint.” ” Marchand wrote the order, which is even more unrealistic because it refers to a future president.
The ruling marked the latest extraordinary development in President Trump’s long-running attack on the rules and laws that govern every other politician, businessman, or American. And the case, which stems from one of four criminal trials the presumptive Republican nominee faces in his bid to retake the White House, encapsulates a moment of national danger. are doing.
The revised executive order still leaves room for Trump to air his grievances against Marchand, as he makes stops in Michigan and Wisconsin on Tuesday and returns to election hearings in the coming weeks. It’s almost certain that it will. Additionally, if past experience with partial gag orders in other cases is any guide, the former president’s constitutional rights as a defendant and his free speech rights as a sitting presidential candidate have been violated. would argue. But thanks to expanded measures announced Monday, Marchand’s family and relatives of the Manhattan district attorney will be barred from entering. The gag order previously prohibited President Trump from making any comments about witnesses, jurors, prosecutors, court officials, or family members of prosecutors or court officials.
Mr Marchand’s recent moves raise serious questions. What will the judge do if President Trump doesn’t follow orders? A fine could be the first step in convicting the world’s most famous criminal defendant. But detention would be a possibility, at least in theory, even if the idea of a former president being sent to prison until he respects the courts invites distrust.
“Normally, a normal defendant would be sent to Rikers,” Adam Pollock, a former New York assistant attorney general, told CNN’s Abby Phillip on Monday, referring to New York’s famous prison. “He will quickly figure out what is the right way to act before trial at Rikers.” But Pollock added, “President Trump is not every other defendant.”
The former president claims he is being targeted by Democrats, but his ability to escape serious consequences for his constant attacks on prosecutors and judges means he enjoys a pardon not available to other defendants. It shows that
President Trump’s goal here is clear. He is seeking to create a circus-like atmosphere surrounding his trial, which begins on April 15, and to delegitimize the legal system that would hold him accountable. He denies wrongdoing but is trying to avoid a potential guilty verdict in a case stemming from falsifying business records related to payments to adult film stars in 2016. In this case and the three others in which he faces criminal charges, the former president also deepens his campaign’s claim, which is also his own main legal defense, that he is the victim of political persecution. I am trying to do.
President Trump’s threats are not just an academic issue. And they are more serious than mere rants on social media, as some of the former president’s Republican apologists often characterize them. Attacking court personnel and their families poses a real security risk. Trump has proven capable of inciting violence with his rhetoric, as was demonstrated when a mob of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. , the situation is particularly tricky.
The revised gag order represents the latest in which the unbridled world of President Trump’s rhetoric collides with facts, evidence, and the rule of law. Those kinds of conflicts will become increasingly central to his fortunes in the coming days.
The same goes for President Trump’s assets. Shares in his media company, Trump Media & Technology Group, plunged Monday after soaring to incredible highs after going public last week. The reversal came as the company that owns the Trump Truth social network revealed it had losses of more than $58 million and almost no income in 2023. Trump is the company’s largest shareholder, and its net worth fell by more than $1 billion on Monday as a result.
But there was better news for the would-be nominee, as he resisted any bid by New York authorities to begin seizing property based on a massive fraud judgment against him after a civil trial in New York. On Monday night, President Trump posted $175 million bail to prevent any action against his storied real estate empire until at least September. At that time, the state appellate court is scheduled to hear the former president’s appeal of a $464 million judgment against him and his adult sons.
Ironically, Trump was able to find an insurance company to back the bond because the court system, which he frequently claims is corrupt and stacked against him, gave him a reprieve. It was after I gave it. Last week, President Trump faced a deadline to post his nearly $500 million bail, but an appeals court reduced the amount and gave him 10 days until Thursday this week.
President Trump attacked two battleground states on Tuesday by paying bail early in a civil fraud case. But this visit is just a break from court matters for the former president.
With a hush-money trial starting in New York in two weeks, Trump will be required to attend four days a week when court is in session, and will be required to be out during President Joe Biden’s inauguration. Opportunities for campaigning will become very complicated. He is accelerating his bid for re-election. Whether this juxtaposition bodes well for the rest of the campaign depends on how Trump’s other lawsuits develop. Three other cases (two over election interference and one over the hoarding of classified documents in Florida) have all stalled in pretrial litigation and appeals, with his team trying to postpone accountability until after the election. There is.
The hush money case is likely to receive even more attention in the coming days.
And it could test Mr. Marchand’s willingness to restrain Mr. Trump and prevent the court from becoming the former president’s de facto political platform. Mr. Trump has already angered several judges elsewhere, most notably Judge Arthur Engoron, who presided over a civil fraud trial and implored Mr. Trump’s lawyers to rein in their unruly clients.
President Trump’s targeting of Marchand’s daughter and other court officials who worked for the Democratic campaign prompted supporters to say the legal system was too corrupt to get a fair trial. It’s part of an attempt to convince them. The case came to light through grand juries and legal proceedings, and he has been given every attempt to mount a defense.
Given the impact of his words in the past, his latest threats pose a special threat.
Temidayo Aganga Williams, a former senior investigative adviser on the last Democratic-run House Jan. 6 Committee, said on CNN on Monday that the court has no choice but to take President Trump’s threats seriously. . “He knows how to call his supporters. He did it on January 6th and I think that’s what he’s doing now… He’s acting with great precision. I think we need to heed that warning now.”
Machan seems to agree.
“The average observer, after hearing the defendant’s recent attacks, concludes that if you become even tangentially involved in these lawsuits, you should be concerned not only for yourself, but also for your loved ones. ,” Marchand writes in his book. I will order it on Monday.
“Such concerns undoubtedly impede the fair administration of justice and constitute a direct attack on the rule of law itself.”
