- Advertisement -
“`html
Skeptical judges signal they could narrow Trump gag order in election interference case
Lawyers for Donald Trump and the Justice Department argued in a federal appeals court about a gag order barring him from disparaging witnesses and prosecutors in the election interference case.
The judges indicated in their questioning that they could leave the gag order in place while narrowing its scope.
Trump’s lawyer argued that leaving the gag order in place would set a “terrible precedent” on “restrictions against core political speech.”
The judges pressed both sides with questions, including concerns about potential threats and harassment resulting from Trump’s public comments.
Skeptical judges signal they could narrow Trump gag order in election interference case
The federal appeals court heard arguments from lawyers for Donald Trump and the Justice Department regarding a gag order in the election interference case. The judges expressed skepticism and indicated the possibility of narrowing the scope of the gag order.
- Advertisement -
Concerns Over Precedent and Free Speech
Trump’s lawyer argued that leaving the gag order in place would set a “terrible precedent” on “restrictions against core political speech.”
Threats and Harassment
The judges raised concerns about potential threats and harassment resulting from Trump’s public comments about witnesses and officials involved in the case.
“`
- Advertisement -
Source Credit
Disclaimer: We want to be clear that the information on Bollyinside.com, including news, articles, reviews, and opinions, is intended for reading and knowledge purposes only. While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, opinion and news, we cannot guarantee the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability of any information. Read more
