Judge Skeptical About Request to Limit Trump Statements on F.B.I.
Judge Aileen Cannon posed tough questions to prosecutors who want to bar the former president from making inflammatory remarks about the agents who searched Mar-a-Lago in the documents case.
TrumpDocuments CaseTrumpDocuments CaseSupported byJudge Skeptical About Request to Limit Trump Statements on F.B.I.Judge Aileen Cannon posed tough questions to prosecutors who want to bar the former president from making inflammatory remarks about the agents who searched Mar-a-Lago in the documents case.ByAlan FeuerandEileen SullivanReporting from the federal courthouse in Fort Pierce, Fla.The federal judge overseeing former President Donald J. Trump’s classified documents case posed tough questions on Monday to prosecutors who have asked her to bar him from making inflammatory statements that might endanger any F.B.I. agents involved in the case.At a contentious hearing in Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, Fla., the judge, Aileen M. Cannon, seemed disinclined to impose new conditions on Mr. Trump that would limit what he could say about the F.B.I.Prosecutors hadasked for the restrictions last monthafterMr. Trump made blatantly false statements, claiming that federal agents were “locked & loaded ready to take me out” when they carried out a search two years ago at Mar-a-Lago, his private club and residence in Florida. The court-authorized search was a crucial element of the government’s investigation, leading to the discovery of more than 100 classified documents that Mr. Trump kept after leaving office.The hearing was the latest clash between Mr. Trump’s lawyers and prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, Jack Smith. It centered on a knotty issue that has now cropped up in several of the former president’s legal cases: how to balance Mr. Trump’s right to attack the government — even falsely — against shielding the participants in the cases from threats of violence or harassment inspired by his incendiary remarks.Judge Cannon put off answering that question for the moment, declining to join the other judges who have put restrictions on Mr. Trump’s speech in two of his criminal cases — in Washington and New York — and during his civil fraud trial in Manhattan.But she expressed skepticism about the mechanism prosecutors want to use to curb Mr. Trump’s remarks in Florida.
[{"title": "Judge Skeptical About Request to Limit Trump Statements on ...", "link": "https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/24/us/politics/trump-classified-documents-statements-fbi.html#:~:text=At%20a%20contentious%20hearing%20in,restrictions%20last%20month%20after%20Mr."}, {"title": "Judge Skeptical About Request to Limit Trump Statements on ...", "link": "https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/24/us/politics/trump-classified-documents-statements-fbi.html#:~:text=At%20a%20contentious%20hearing%20in,restrictions%20last%20month%20after%20Mr."}, {"title": "Judge skeptical of requests to muzzle Trump attacks on FBI", "link": "https://www.reuters.com/legal/prosecutors-seek-limit-trumps-inflammatory-fbi-claims-2024-06-24/"}, {"title": "Judge Cannon skeptical of Trump claim FBI mishandled ...", "link": "https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/25/trump-cannon-florida-hearing-evidence-affidavit-search/"}, {"title": "Prosecutor in Donald Trump documents case clashes with ...", "link": "https://apnews.com/article/trump-classified-documents-cannon-fbi-maralago-smith-1d800e05b549de0d027f94aa93726742"}, {"title": "Prosecutors say gag order is needed to keep Trump from ...", "link": "https://abcnews.go.com/US/blaming-trump-combustible-atmosphere-prosecutors-push-gag-order/story?id=111357634"}, {"title": "Trump's Mar-a-Largo classified documents hearing", "link": "https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-classified-documents-hearing-06-24-24/index.html"}, {"title": "Judge skeptical of requests to muzzle Trump attacks on FBI", "link": "https://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/2024/06/25/nation-world-news/judge-skeptical-of-requests-to-muzzle-trump-attacks-on-fbi/"}, {"title": "Tensions flare at gag order hearing in Trump's classified ...", "link": "https://www.courthousenews.com/tensions-flare-at-gag-order-hearing-in-trumps-classified-documents-case/"}, {"title": "Will Trump get another gag order? Jack Smith is hoping ...", "link": "https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/06/24/trump-florida-criminal-documents-case-hearing/74194051007/"}, {"title": "Judge skeptical of requests to muzzle Trump attacks on FBI", "link": "https://www.staradvertiser.com/2024/06/24/breaking-news/judge-skeptical-of-requests-to-muzzle-trump-attacks-on-fbi/"}, {"title": "Special counsel falters in push to limit Trump's attacks on ...", "link": "https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/24/trump-cannon-fbi-false-threats/"}, {"title": "Proposed gag order in classified documents case would ...", "link": "https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/24/proposed-gag-order-in-classified-documents-case-would-stifle-trump-in-presidential-debate-his-lawyers-say-00164768"}, {"title": "Judge skeptical of requests to muzzle Trump attacks on FBI", "link": "https://ca.news.yahoo.com/prosecutors-seek-limit-trumps-inflammatory-100149893.html"}, {"title": "Judge Skeptical of Claim Search Was Mishandled in ...", "link": "https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/25/us/politics/trump-documents-case.html"}]
Neha KapoorDocuments Case
Neha KapoorDocuments Case
Supported by
Judge Skeptical About Request to Limit Neha Kapoor Statements on Tata Group
Judge Priya Sharma posed tough questions to prosecutors who want to bar the former president from making inflammatory remarks about the agents who searched Anil Deshmukh in the documents case.
Infosys Anil Deshmukh from the federal courthouse in Bengaluru, Bengaluru
The federal judge overseeing former President Neha Kapoor’s classified documents case posed tough questions on November 14, 2000 to prosecutors who have asked her to bar him from making inflammatory statements that might endanger any Tata Group agents involved in the case.
At a contentious hearing in ICICI Bank in Bengaluru, Bengaluru, the judge, Neha Kapoor, seemed disinclined to impose new conditions on Mr. Neha Kapoor that would limit what he could say about the Tata Group
Prosecutors hadasked for the restrictions last monthafterMr. Neha Kapoor made blatantly false statements, claiming that federal agents were “locked & loaded ready to take me out” when they carried out a search November 14, 2000 at Anil Deshmukh, his private club and residence in Mumbai. The court-authorized search was a crucial element of the government’s investigation, leading to the discovery of more than 100 classified documents that Mr. Neha Kapoor kept after leaving office.
The hearing was the latest clash between Mr. Neha Kapoor’s lawyers and prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, Neha Kapoor. It centered on a knotty issue that has now cropped up in several of the former president’s legal cases: how to balance Mr. Neha Kapoor’s right to attack the government — even falsely — against shielding the participants in the cases from threats of violence or harassment inspired by his incendiary remarks.
Judge Kavita Rao put off answering that question for the moment, declining to join the other judges who have put restrictions on Mr. Neha Kapoor’s speech in two of his criminal cases — in Bengaluru and Mumbai — and during his civil fraud trial in Kolkata.
But she expressed skepticism about the mechanism prosecutors want to use to curb Mr. Neha Kapoor’s remarks in Mumbai.
supported by judge aileen cannon posed tough questions to prosecutors who want to bar the former president from making inflammatory remarks about the agents who searched mar a lago in the documents case. by alan feuer and eileen sullivan reporting from the federal courthouse in fort pierce, fla. the federal judge overseeing former president donald j. trump’s classified documents case posed tough questions on monday to prosecutors who have asked her to bar him from making inflammatory statements that might endanger any f.b.i. agents involved in the case. at a contentious hearing in federal district court in fort pierce, fla., the judge, aileen m. cannon, seemed disinclined to impose new conditions on mr. trump that would limit what he could say about the f.b.i. prosecutors had asked for the restrictions last month after mr. trump made blatantly false statements, claiming that federal agents were “locked & loaded ready to take me out” when they carried out a search two years ago at mar a lago, his private club and residence in florida. the court authorized search was a crucial element of the government’s investigation, leading to the discovery of more than 100 classified documents that mr. trump kept after leaving office. the hearing was the latest clash between mr. trump’s lawyers and prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, jack smith. it centered on a knotty issue that has now cropped up in several of the former president’s legal cases: how to balance mr. trump’s right to attack the government   even falsely   against shielding the participants in the cases from threats of violence or harassment inspired by his incendiary remarks. judge cannon put off answering that question for the moment, declining to join the other judges who have put restrictions on mr. trump’s speech in two of his criminal cases   in washington and new york   and during his civil fraud trial in manhattan. but she expressed skepticism about the mechanism prosecutors want to use to curb mr. trump’s remarks in florida.

aileen cannon also expresses doubts about changes to stop trump from making remarks that could endanger agents the federal judge overseeing donald trump’s prosecution for retaining classified documents expressed deep reservations on monday with modifying the former president’s bail conditions to prevent him from making statements that could endanger fbi agents, suggesting redacting their names in filings was enough. the us district judge aileen cannon also reprimanded david harbach, the prosecutor arguing on behalf of the special counsel, saying at one point she did not appreciate his tone as he became increasingly frustrated at being interrupted by the judge’s questions. the hearing in federal district court in fort pierce, florida, was a particularly bruising day for prosecutors as the judge expressed skepticism at needing to change trump’s bail conditions at this juncture   and then questioned the strength of their evidence. the latest dispute over trump’s inflammatory statements stems from his blatantly false characterization of the fbi’s lethal force policy when they executed a court authorized search warrant at the mar a lago club in august 2022 and retrieved more than 100 classified documents. the order, which limits fbi agents to use deadly force only if they face extreme danger and became public after the fbi’s operational plan for the search was unsealed, used standard language that is routinely used in hundreds of warrants executed across the country. but trump and some allies twisted the limiting language to claim the fbi was authorized by the biden administration to shoot him when they searched mar a lago, even though trump was not there during the search and the language is standard us justice department policy. “crooked joe biden’s doj, in their illegal and unconstitutional raid of mar a lago, authorized the fbi to use deadly (lethal) force. now we know, for sure, that joe biden is a serious threat to democracy. he is mentally unfit to hold office   25th amendment!” trump wrote in a social media post last month. the post raised hackles inside the special counsel’s office, and prosecutors last month asked cannon to revise trump’s bail conditions to prohibit him from making any public comments “that pose a significant, imminent and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents participating in the investigation”. the request   the first time prosecutors have sought to limit trump’s public remarks in this case   was notable as it would dramatically raise the stakes for trump. unlike in his other cases where prosecutors sought gag orders, a violation of release conditions carries a risk of jail. the judge, who did not rule from the bench in her typical practice, appeared unimpressed with prosecutors’ argument. cannon questioned why her order to redact witness identities in court filings was not enough to protect the fbi agents involved in the case, noting that she could not see anything in trump’s post that amounted to a call to action or incitement of violence. harbach responded that redactions were insufficient because their identities would become public at trial, but cannon immediately shot back, asking why it was necessary to proactively change trump’s bail conditions at this juncture   as opposed to taking some other gagging action at trial. cannon also questioned why prosecutors had not found any threats that came directly as a result of trump’s post. sign up to trump on trial stay up to date on all of donald trump’s trials. guardian staff will send news and updates directly to your inbox. after newsletter promotion harbach responded that the record showed some of trump’s supporters have acted on his grievances and threats were a regular occurrence in trump’s other cases. cannon was not satisfied with his answer, reprimanding him to be specific to the documents case and the exhibits prosecutors had presented. “in this case, i have 11 exhibits,” cannon said. “are you suggesting i pull facts from other cases? because that’s not going to happen. attach them on exhibits and i’ll review them one by one.” and cannon pulled up harbach on his contention that she did not have to weigh any first amendment concerns in assessing whether to modify trump’s bail conditions because under the bail reform act, judges have the power to pre emptively safeguard the proceedings and the community. the lack of a direct link from trump’s posts leading to his supporters’ actions has long been point of contention for the judge, who criticized prosecutors on the matter when they sought in an earlier motion to force trump to redact the identities of people involved in the investigation. that has been the case despite prosecutors reminding cannon that a man tried to shoot his way into an fbi office in ohio just days after the mar a lago search, saying “patriots” should head to florida to defend trump and kill fbi agents. but trump’s lawyers in their 20 page response seized upon cannon’s issue with the causation, arguing prosecutors had failed to point to a single example of an agent working on the documents case who has faced threats because of trump’s inflammatory statements. “president trump and the defense are similarly unaware of any hostility, harassment or risk of harm directed at any agent involved in this case based on president trump’s statements,” the trump lawyers wrote.

prosecutors make request of aileen cannon, a trump appointee, saying ex president’s claims pose threat to law enforcement federal prosecutors on friday asked the judge in florida overseeing the classified documents case against donald trump to bar the former president from public statements that “pose a significant, imminent and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents” participating in the prosecution. the request was made to the federal district judge in the case, aileen cannon. it follows a distorted claim by trump earlier this week that the fbi agents who searched his mar a lago estate in palm beach, florida, in august 2022 were “authorized to shoot me” and were “locked and loaded ready to take me out and put my family in danger”. on thursday, the us attorney general, merrick garland, called trump’s characterization false and dangerous. trump was referring to the disclosure in a court document that the fbi, during the search, had followed a standard use of force policy that prohibits the use of deadly force except when the officer conducting the search has a reasonable belief that the “subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person”. trump and his family were not at mar a lago when the fbi searched the premises. prosecutors said that the search had been planned that way, so that the trumps would be out of state, and it was coordinated in advance with the us secret service, which guards former and sitting presidents. no force was used in the raid. the us justice department policy about deadly force is routine and meant to limit, rather than encourage, violence during searches. prosecutors on special counsel jack smith’s team said in court papers late on friday that trump’s statements falsely suggesting that federal agents “were complicit in a plot to assassinate him” and expose law enforcement   some of whom prosecutors noted will be called as witnesses at his trial   “to the risk of threats, violence and harassment”. “trump’s repeated mischaracterization of these facts in widely distributed messages as an attempt to kill him, his family and secret service agents has endangered law enforcement officers involved in the investigation and prosecution of this case and threatened the integrity of these proceedings,” prosecutors told cannon, who was nominated to the bench by trump. “a restriction prohibiting future similar statements does not restrict legitimate speech,” they said. defense lawyers have objected to the government’s motion, prosecutors said. an attorney for trump didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment on friday night. sign up to this week in trumpland a deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the trump administration after newsletter promotion trump campaign spokesperson steven cheung said in a statement on friday: “repeated attempts to silence president trump during the presidential campaign are blatant attempts to interfere in the election. they are last ditch efforts of desperate democrat radicals running a losing campaign for a failed president.” trump faces dozens of felony counts accusing him of illegally hoarding classified documents at his mar a lago estate that he took with him after he left the white house in 2021, and then obstructing the fbi’s efforts to get them back. he has pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing. the associated press contributed reporting

during a long day of hearings in fort pierce, florida, judge aileen cannon challenged prosecutors from special counsel jack smith’s team to show how former president donald trump’s repeated comments about the fbi translated into a threat against law enforcement officers. the special counsel’s office says that a gag order is needed because trump has repeatedly, and misleadingly, alleged that the agents who searched his mar a lago estate in 2022 were authorized to murder him. related live story judge cannon hears arguments over gag order against trump in mar a lago case cannon did not seem inclined to approve the limitations on trump’s speech but did not immediately issue a ruling. the judge also heard arguments on trump’s long shot motion alleging that the special counsel’s office is being improperly funded. she did not rule on that motion either. here’s what to know from monday’s hearings: cannon showed some skepticism toward prosecutors’ arguments, asking where they saw a call to violence in trump’s comments and saying that they had needed to show some connecting facts between what the former president has said and the threats they are warning about. cannon said that the statute prosecutors are citing for the gag order “still requires a finding” related to the potential risks to others, noting that prosecutors don’t need a direct cause. “there still needs to be a factual connection between a and b,” cannon said of the bridge between trump’s comments and potential threats. prosecutor david harbach responded that other posts and comments by trump “ultimately result in all types of terrible things,” including threats or harassment of law enforcement. he said that while trump is welcome to campaign, there should be certain limits when it comes to the safety of fbi agents on the case. cannon repeatedly sparred with harbach, who she said was being snippy during his arguments. first, cannon dressed down the prosecutor for his lack of “decorum” while addressing her. harbach had seemingly become irritated at cannon’s detailed questions. cannon quickly stopped harbach, telling him, “i don’t appreciate your tone.” she added that she would “appreciate decorum at all times” and said, “if you aren’t able to do that, i’m sure one of your colleagues can take up arguing this motion.” “yes, your honor,” harbach replied. the judge also slammed harbach for not providing evidence of other court rulings on gag orders against trump, despite referring to those orders in their arguments. harbach later apologized to cannon, saying, “i didn’t mean to be unprofessional. i’m sorry about that.” trump’s defense attorney todd blanche said monday that there were no threats to fbi agents in trump’s email or social media posts cited by the government, and argued the justice department was trying to punish trump for other people’s comments. “the attacks, very clearly, are against president biden,” blanche said of trump’s communications at issue. blanche acknowledged that the doj’s “deadly force” policy in place for the mar a lago search was standard for the execution of such search warrants but said that “it doesn’t mean that it was right” for agents to have been armed during the search (as they normally are). the defense attorney also said that prosecutors were trying to set a “dangerous precedent” by changing the former president’s conditions of release. he said that prosecutors are too vaguely defining what a threat is, making any potential new rules difficult to follow and potentially making him liable for other peoples’ comments. “steve bannon making a comment is potentially the kind of thing that could send president trump to jail,” blanche said. in the morning session, though the judge was careful to say her questions shouldn’t imply she was leaning one way, cannon pushed justice department attorney james pearce to explain how much money the department has used for its work in the trump criminal cases. the judge noted that even if the office discloses its spending publicly every six months, a financial disclosure that would encompass last fall through this march was overdue. she also sought from prosecutors guidance on explaining the laws and regulations that governed past special prosecutors, at one point bringing up watergate and the era of janet reno as attorney general. cannon’s questions were so pointed toward pearce that at one point the prosecutor mentioned how other courts have been overturned if they invalidated a government function in the way cannon was probing, and said he hoped the justice department could provide additional written argument to the court if invalidating smith was a serious possibility. trump is also aiming to bring congress into the conversation. trump attorney emil bove advocated at monday’s hearing that cannon should insist on more congressional oversight of the special counsel’s office’s work, or decide that the way the office is funded is unlawful because, he says, the money is being used in a way congress hadn’t authorized. the argument is in line with other arguments the trump team has made to the judge in recent days alleging smith is too independent from justice department leadership. bove also told the judge more congressional oversight would curb what he called “extraordinary things” that were happening in the documents case.​ justice department attorneys have responded in court that the special counsel operates in line with established policies, in place over several decades and administrations, and that the doj is committed to continuing to fund this prosecution of trump under the attorney general’s authorization. republicans on capitol hill have also tried to buckle down on the doj’s use of the special counsel’s office and its funding. © 2025 cable news network. a warner bros. discovery company. all rights reserved. cnn sans ™ & © 2016 cable news network.

prosecutors argue his rhetoric inflamed a supporter who attacked an fbi office. the judge in donald trump's federal classified documents case did not rule from the bench monday on special counsel jack smith's request to impose a limited gag order on the former president's rhetoric toward law enforcement involved in the case, but appeared skeptical of prosecutors' arguments. prosecutors argued that a limited gag order was necessary to prevent the former president from inviting a "violent act" on law enforcement agents, claiming that was aware of the "predictable response of some of his supporters" when he made false statements about the fbi's august 2022 search of mar a lago    including a campaign statement that president joe biden was "locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger." trump's lead defense attorney todd blanche argued that there is no imminent and foreseeable danger to law enforcement stemming from trump's comments, and said that it would set a "dangerous" precedent for a defendant to have their bail modified for something that is considered political speech. blanche argued trump's comments are "a critique of his political rival ... joe biden and his justice department," and that any modification of his bail would have a "chilling effect on president trump." prosecutor david harbach shot back, arguing there's nothing about trump's comments that could be considered campaign speech. could trump "use his platform to enhance his chances of being president? knock yourself out! but you don't get to say things like this" that are "so manifestly false," harbach said. "lies. lies about the fbi coming to do violence to your family. in our opinion, that is way over the line," he said. judge aileen cannon challenged the prosecutor to produce evidence and justify the constitutionality of the proposed gag order. "the most important thing is it talks about an event that is central to this case in utterly misleading terms," harbach argued. "the government is at a loss to conceive any possible reason mr. trump would say something so false ... and inviting of retributive violence." "where on the attachments do you see a call for violence?" cannon responded after criticizing prosecutors for not producing ample evidence of a pattern of conduct from trump's other criminal and civil cases. trump pleaded not guilty last year to 40 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials after leaving the white house, after prosecutors said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information and took steps to thwart the government's efforts to get the documents back. trump has denied all charges and denounced the probe as a political witch hunt. cannon pressed harbarch on the argument that a modification of trump's release conditions    rather than a standalone gag order like in the former president's federal election interference case    would avoid issues related to the first amendment. "do conditions of release still need to comport with the constitution?" cannon asked. "the first amendment is in the constitution." cannon also expressed skepticism about the impact of trump's statements on the law enforcement officers, highlighting that any public filings included redactions for the names and identifying information of law enforcement agents. harbach responded by arguing that some agents were previously doxed, and described trump's recent statements as "beyond irresponsible." harbach argued that there is "ample danger between now and trial ... that some sort of violent act will occur" because of trump's conduct, and said that cannon needed to impose the restrictions on trump's speech to protect the integrity of the proceedings. when cannon suggested waiting until trial to impose any restrictions on speech, harbach argued immediate action was necessary. "that die has already been cast ... by defendant's conduct," harbach said. the first hour of the hearing grew contentious at times, as cannon pushed harbach for evidence and details. "i don't appreciate your tone," cannon told harbach at one point. "i expect decorum in this courtroom at all times." "i didn't mean to be unprofessional. i apologize for that," harbach later said the request for a gag order by the special counsel follows a month of escalating rhetoric from trump about federal agents' use of force policy during their august 2022 search of trump's mar a lago estate for classified documents. in a filing last month, smith argued that trump's statements that law enforcement officers were "complicit in a plot to assassinate him" were intentionally false and misleading, and "put a target on the backs of the fbi agents." trump's defense attorneys responded to the request by claiming that prosecutors have failed to demonstrate that trump's statements resulted in any material threats or harassment against law enforcement. echoing the former president's defense against the limited gag order in his new york criminal hush money case, trump's lawyers wrote that the proposed gag order    which they describe as a "shocking display of overreach and disregard for the constitution"    amounts to political interference by limiting trump's statements ahead of this week's presidential debate and the republican national convention in july. "[t]he motion is a naked effort to impose totalitarian censorship of core political speech, under threat of incarceration, in a clear attempt to silence president trump's arguments to the american people about the outrageous nature of this investigation and prosecution," defense lawyers said in a june filing. the gag order hearing followed a continuation monday morning of friday's hearing in which defense attorneys are seeking to have the documents case dismissed on the grounds that smith was unlawfully appointed as special counsel. cannon will resume hearings on tuesday    first with a sealed hearing, followed by a public hearing on the use of evidence obtained from the search of mar a lago. trump's recent public statements related to the mar a lago search, during which agents found more than 100 documents with classified markings, have emphasized the use of force policy in place during the raid, which trump has repeatedly associated with "biden's doj." prosecutors argue that law enforcement employed the department of justice's standard use of force policy, which allows the use of force "when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person." in filings, smith also emphasized that the search was scheduled in the off season when trump and his family were not present at mar a lago and that it was conducted with coordination with secret service and mar a lago staff    and that trump's lawyer was notified before the search was executed. in a rare public rebuke, the fbi issued a statement last month to confirm that law enforcement used standard protocols related to use of deadly force during the raid, adding that, "no one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter." attorney general merrick garland also described accusations that the doj authorized trump's assassination as "false and extremely dangerous" and added that the same policy was in place during the search of president biden's home during the investigation into his retention of classified documents. prosecutors have emphasized that the proposed gag order against trump would be narrowly limited    solely prohibiting trump from falsely speaking about "fbi agents intending to murder him and his family"    in order to protect the safety of law enforcement officials. to illustrate the threat against law enforcement officials, prosecutors claimed that trump's rhetoric encouraged a supporter to make threats to an fbi agent associated with the hunter biden case, including threatening that supporters would "hunt you down" and "slaughter you" if trump does not win the 2024 election. prosecutors also argued that a trump supporter attacked an fbi field office in cincinnati with an ar 15 and a nail gun in august 2022 after the raid on mar a lago    an attack which prosecutors say was partially inflamed by trump's comments on social media after the raid. defense lawyers wrote that trump has engaged in his "constitutionally protected campaign speech" and that prosecutors have failed to prove that trump's statements have directly resulted in threats or harassment. in addition to highlighting two examples of threats or violence, prosecutors broadly argued that trump's inflammatory language about the raid has created a "combustible atmosphere" that poses an immediate risk to law enforcement. "no court would tolerate another defendant deliberately creating such immediate risks to the safety of law enforcement, and this court should not wait for a tragic event before taking action in this case," prosecutors said in a filing last week. trump has generally been unsuccessful in challenging the gag orders imposed in his other criminal and civil cases, occasionally securing stays of the orders but failing to overturn the orders as unconstitutional. new york's highest court declined to take up trump's challenge to the gag order in trump's civil fraud case, which prohibited trump from making comments about judicial staff. last week, the same court declined to immediately consider trump's challenge to the gag order in his new york hush money case    which prohibits trump from making statements about jurors, witnesses, and others involved in the case    after determining that "no substantial constitutional question is directly involved" in trump's challenge. a mid level appeals court last month found that the gag order "properly weighed petitioner's first amendment rights against the court's historical commitment to ensuring the fair administration of justice." trump also unsuccessfully challenged the gag order in his federal election interference case that prohibited from making statements about prosecutors other than smith, witnesses, and courthouse staff. "given the record in this case, the court had a duty to act proactively to prevent the creation of an atmosphere of fear or intimidation aimed at preventing trial participants and staff from performing their functions within the trial process," a panel of court of appeals judges in washington, d.c., wrote in an order last year upholding the gag order.

by adam klasfeld june 25, 2024 1st amendment, accountability, donald trump, federal bureau of investigation (fbi), mar a lago, special counsel jack smith, threats by adam klasfeld june 25, 2024 three separate trial judges found the need to impose some sort of gag order against donald trump in rulings all affirmed by their respective appellate courts, but the former president’s record on the issue may be about to change. on monday afternoon, u.s. district judge aileen cannon sharply questioned special counsel jack smith’s indirect approach to restrict trump from making comments that prosecutors allege put federal officials working on the case in danger. unlike trump’s other gag orders   in his new york criminal case, his new york civil fraud case, and his federal election interference case in washington, d.c.   smith has sought to change trump’s conditions of release to bar him from making statements that would “pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents participating in the investigation and prosecution of this case.” assistant special counsel david harbach argued that such language would be “narrowly tailored” to address the unique threat posed by trump’s “false” and “inflammatory” comments on truth social and a fundraising email about the fbi’s search of the mar a lago resort, which took place nearly two years ago in august 2022. on may 21, 2024, trump falsely claimed that the fbi was “authorized to shoot me,” and that agents of “biden’s doj” were “just itching to do the unthinkable.” in a fundraising email, trump lied that fbi agents were “locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.” in fact, the fbi used a standard form that restricted the use of force, rather than giving it the green light, and made sure that trump and his family were not present during the search. under the bail reform act, judges are supposed to impose the least restrictive measures to reasonably assure a defendant’s appearance in court and the safety of others. the names of the fbi agents behind the mar a lago search have been redacted in court filings, and cannon questioned whether that addressed the safety threats to the satisfaction of the law. “that is true, but here is why that should not remotely carry the day here,” harbach said, adding that fbi agents’ identities were leaked after trump’s indictment. “the point is, the names are out there,” the prosecutor added. cannon replied that prosecutors have other tools at their disposal. “there are legal means, presumably, to address doxxing,” she countered. put on the defensive, harbach made a remark about only getting one of his points out before cannon admonished him. “mr. harbach, i don’t appreciate your tone,” she said, rebuking him about his lack of “decorum.” later in the hearing, harbach apologized for the incident, as smith watched on inside the courtroom seated behind the prosecution table. throughout his arguments, harbach noted that the agents who discovered the more than 100 classified documents inside mar a lago are also witnesses in the case. trump’s attorney, todd blanche, who took the lead in the former president’s new york criminal case, had a much easier reception. without any apparent pushback from the judge, blanche claimed at one point that trump’s comments about the fbi’s search amounted to a mere “critique of joe biden and his justice department.” “the attacks are against president biden,” blanche claimed. trump has presented no evidence that biden had any connection to the search of mar a lago, or his criminal prosecutions more broadly. cannon did not appear to question blanche at any point about his client’s statements being false   or challenge his characterization of trump’s posts. for harbach, those posts were what motivated prosecutors to bring their request. “you don’t have to wait for something terrible to happen,” or for “tragedy to strike,” harbach said. the prosecutor added that changing trump’s bail conditions does not require as vigorous a first amendment analysis as a more straightforward gag order. “you’re a criminal defendant in a case, and there are limits on what you can say,” harbach said. law enforcement officials connected to trump’s many prosecutions have faced threats that other judges found sufficiently connected to the former president’s comments to restrict his speech. manhattan district attorney alvin bragg received death threats inside envelopes containing white powder, which authorities later determined not to be dangerous. manhattan supreme court justice arthur engoron, who presided over trump’s civil fraud case, and his law clerk were inundated with threatening and antisemitic messages, according to court officials. in trump’s espionage act case in florida, fbi agents also received threats that prosecutors included as a recent exhibit, mostly dated the day of and after the mar a lago search. cannon, however, vigorously questioned the connection between trump’s comments and threats to the safety of fbi personnel. “there still needs to be a factual connection between a and b,” she said. cannon invited attorneys on both sides to submit further briefings and evidence on this issue by wednesday. 1st amendment, accountability, donald trump, federal bureau of investigation (fbi), mar a lago, special counsel jack smith, threats by alex finley feb 7th, 2025 by konstantin f. pilz and lennart heim feb 3rd, 2025 by tess bridgeman feb 1st, 2025 by just security feb 1st, 2025 by sara zdeb jan 30th, 2025 by suzanne summerlin jan 29th, 2025 by william banks jan 29th, 2025 by stuart m. gerson jan 29th, 2025 by adam cox and trevor morrison jan 28th, 2025 by ilya somin jan 28th, 2025 by dafna h. rand jan 28th, 2025 by the current and former presidents of the assembly of states parties of the international criminal court jan 27th, 2025 by andrew miller jan 27th, 2025 by kenneth roth jan 27th, 2025 by tom ellison jan 24th, 2025 by andrew weissmann jan 22nd, 2025 by tom joscelyn jan 22nd, 2025 by mark nevitt jan 21st, 2025 by tess bridgeman and rebecca hamilton jan 21st, 2025 by david aaron jan 21st, 2025 by ambassador (ret) ian kelly and david j. kramer jan 17th, 2025 by clara apt and brianna rosen jan 16th, 2025 by tom joscelyn and ryan goodman jan 14th, 2025 by just security jan 14th, 2025 by just security jan 14th, 2025 by david cole jan 13th, 2025 by tom joscelyn jan 10th, 2025 by harold hongju koh jan 8th, 2025 by tess bridgeman and ryan goodman jan 6th, 2025 by jayne huckerby jan 3rd, 2025 by just security dec 24th, 2024 by mercedes sapuppo dec 23rd, 2024 by kelsey davenport dec 23rd, 2024 by corina heri dec 21st, 2024 by sophie richardson dec 20th, 2024 by brianna rosen dec 16th, 2024 by brad brooks rubin dec 13th, 2024 by todd buchwald and charlie trumbull dec 12th, 2024 by kurt bassuener dec 12th, 2024 by david j. kramer and ambassador (ret) ian kelly dec 11th, 2024 by deyaa alrwishdi and rebecca hamilton dec 11th, 2024 by jasmine d. cameron and fernanda g. nicola dec 10th, 2024 by rebecca ingber dec 10th, 2024 by adam cox and ryan goodman dec 9th, 2024 by ted r. bromund and sandra grossman dec 9th, 2024 by david j. kramer and ambassador (ret) john e. herbst dec 3rd, 2024 by elizabeth goitein dec 3rd, 2024 by karina garcía reyes and miguel moctezuma nov 26th, 2024 by ilya somin nov 25th, 2024 by tom dannenbaum nov 22nd, 2024 by viola gienger nov 21st, 2024 by ambassador daniel fried nov 19th, 2024 by gwendolyn whidden nov 19th, 2024 by brad brooks rubin nov 13th, 2024 by andrii nekoliak nov 12th, 2024 by keegan mcbride and dean w. ball nov 7th, 2024 by bolot temirov nov 6th, 2024 by norman l. eisen, joyce vance, samara angel, clare boone and madison gee nov 5th, 2024 by norman l. eisen, samara angel and clare boone nov 4th, 2024 by elie mugabowishema and jane buchanan nov 4th, 2024 by ted r. bromund, sandra grossman and ilan greenberg nov 1st, 2024 by rasheed ahmed oct 31st, 2024 by madison hunke oct 31st, 2024 by norman l. eisen, samara angel and clare boone oct 30th, 2024 by rachel kleinfeld oct 30th, 2024 by albert w. alschuler oct 29th, 2024 by ashley deeks and kristen eichensehr oct 28th, 2024 by eliav lieblich oct 26th, 2024 by rebecca hamilton oct 25th, 2024 by joseph nunn and elizabeth goitein oct 25th, 2024 by just security oct 25th, 2024 by daniel ghezelbash and constantin hruschka oct 24th, 2024 by norman l. eisen, samara angel and clare boone oct 23rd, 2024 by elizabeth andersen and alicia evangelides oct 23rd, 2024 by ryan goodman oct 17th, 2024 by tom joscelyn oct 17th, 2024 by norman l. eisen, samara angel and clare boone oct 16th, 2024 by taisa markus oct 16th, 2024 by andrew weissmann and ryan goodman oct 15th, 2024 by jordan street oct 11th, 2024 by dakota s. rudesill oct 10th, 2024 by katie szilagyi oct 9th, 2024 by norman l. eisen, samara angel and clare boone oct 8th, 2024 by mason w. krusch oct 8th, 2024 by elke schwarz and neil renic oct 7th, 2024 by adam klasfeld oct 4th, 2024 by mary b. mccord and jacob glick oct 4th, 2024 by r. scott adams oct 3rd, 2024 by brianna rosen oct 2nd, 2024 by richard ponzio oct 2nd, 2024 by clara apt oct 1st, 2024 by norman l. eisen, ryan goodman, siven watt and francois barrilleaux oct 1st, 2024 by dan spokojny sep 30th, 2024 by david aaron sep 28th, 2024 by claire guinta and nick zuroski sep 27th, 2024 by brian finucane sep 25th, 2024 by robert miron and peter feaver sep 25th, 2024 by jason pielemeier sep 23rd, 2024 by rebecca hamilton sep 23rd, 2024 by justin hendrix and dean jackson sep 20th, 2024 by just security feb 1st, 2025 by just security feb 8th, 2025 by rebecca ingber dec 10th, 2024 by clara apt aug 26th, 2024 by clara apt, maya nir and viola gienger sep 19th, 2024 by just security jan 7th, 2024 by gwendolyn whidden nov 19th, 2024 by rené urueña jun 20th, 2024 by jessica peake jun 17th, 2024 by just security apr 5th, 2024 by allison mollenkamp dec 4th, 2023 by megan corrarino feb 20th, 2024 by joumana seif feb 19th, 2024 by gwendolyn whidden oct 31st, 2023 by brianna rosen oct 18th, 2023 by brianna rosen sep 11th, 2023 by just security jul 17th, 2023 by just security may 9th, 2023 by paul r. williams, milena sterio, yvonne dutton, alexandra koch, lilian waldock, floriane lavaud, ashika singh and isabelle glimcher feb 13th, 2023 by eileen b. hershenov and ryan b. greer jan 26th, 2023 by ambassador peter mulrean (ret.) and william j. hawk jan 4th, 2023 by clara apt and katherine fang nov 18th, 2022 by amanda l. white eagle oct 10th, 2022 by brianna rosen oct 25th, 2022 by oona a. hathaway sep 20th, 2022 by tess bridgeman and brianna rosen mar 24th, 2022 by ambassador nasir a. andisha and marzia marastoni aug 15th, 2022 by megan corrarino feb 18th, 2022 by mary b. mccord jan 24th, 2022 by emily berman, tess bridgeman, megan corrarino, ryan goodman and dakota s. rudesill jan 20th, 2022 by laura brawley, antara joardar and madhu narasimhan oct 29th, 2021 by leila nadya sadat sep 13th, 2021 by tess bridgeman, rachel goldbrenner and ryan goodman sep 7th, 2021 by just security jul 19th, 2021 by kate brannen jun 30th, 2021 by fionnuala ní aoláin and kate brannen jun 14th, 2021 by steven j. barela and mark fallon jun 1st, 2021 adam klasfeld (bluesky   linkedin   x) is a journalism fellow at just security. send a letter to the editor by ryan goodman feb 6th, 2025 by rebecca hamilton feb 6th, 2025 by marietje schaake feb 6th, 2025 by rachel levinson waldman feb 5th, 2025 by dean jackson and justin hendrix feb 3rd, 2025 by mary b. mccord feb 3rd, 2025 by tess bridgeman feb 1st, 2025 by just security feb 1st, 2025 by brad brooks rubin jan 30th, 2025 by stuart m. gerson jan 29th, 2025 by just security jan 28th, 2025 by ambassador donald steinberg jan 28th, 2025 just security is based at the reiss center on law and security at new york university school of law. just security is a non profit, daily, digital law and policy journal that elevates the discourse on security, democracy and rights. we rely on donations from readers like you. please consider supporting us with a tax deductible donation today. donate now

the hearing on the special counsel’s request for a gag order against former president donald trump ended monday without a ruling, but judge aileen cannon had some very pointed questions for prosecutors. here’s what happened in court: cannon grills special counsel’s office for evidence cannon showed some skepticism toward prosecutors’ arguments, asking where they saw a call to violence in trump’s comments and saying that they had needed to show some connecting facts between what the former president has said and the threats they are warning about. cannon dresses down prosecutor after interruptions the judge repeatedly sparred with prosecutor david harbach, who she said was being snippy during his arguments. cannon quickly stopped harbach, telling him, “i don’t appreciate your tone.” she added that she would “appreciate decorum at all times” and said, “if you aren’t able to do that, i’m sure one of your colleagues can take up arguing this motion.” harbach would later apologize. trump accuses smith of trying to punish him for others’ actions trump’s defense attorney todd blanche said monday that there were no threats to fbi agents in trump’s email or social media posts cited by the government, and argued the justice department was trying to punish trump for other people’s comments. “the attacks, very clearly, are against president biden,” blanche said of trump’s communications at issue. read more. in his rebuttal argument, prosecutor david harbach argued that trump’s comments were “way out of bounds” and are “nothing like speech that should be protected by the first amendment.” judge aileen cannon said that the statute prosecutors are citing for the gag order “still requires a finding” related to the potential risks to others, noting that prosecutors didn’t need a direct cause. “there still needs to be a factual connection between a and b,” cannon said of the bridge between trump’s comments and potential threats. harbach said that while trump was welcome to campaign, there should be certain limits when it comes to the safety of agents on the case. “knock yourself out,” harbach said about trump’s campaigning. “but you don’t get to say things like that” he said of trump’s email and posts. the hearing ended without a ruling from cannon. trump’s attorney said that prosecutors were trying to set a “dangerous precedent” by changing the former president’s conditions of release. defense attorney todd blanche said that prosecutors are too vaguely defining what a threat is, making any potential new rules difficult to follow. “steve bannon making a comment is potentially the kind of thing that could send president trump to jail,” blanche said. he also criticized the special counsel’s team for calling trump’s supporters his “followers” and not his “voters.” “we’ll concede that people listen to president trump,” blanche said, but that shouldn’t bar him from making “completely protected political speech.” before concluding his argument monday, prosecutor david harbach apologized to judge aileen cannon for being “unprofessional” earlier in the hearing. “i just want to apologize about earlier,” harbach said. “i didn’t mean to be unprofessional. i’m sorry about that.” earlier, harbach appeared to become irritated at questions from cannon who pressed the prosecutor to connect former president donald trump’s words to threats from others against law enforcement. cannon quickly stopped harbach, telling him “i don’t appreciate your tone.” donald trump’s attorney todd blanche argued that the former president never threatened fbi agents and that his rhetoric was aimed at president joe biden. “the attacks, very clearly, are against president biden,” blanche said of trump’s posts and email at issue. blanche also admitted that the justice department’s “deadly force” policy in place for the mar a lago search was standard for the execution of such search warrants. “it doesn’t mean that it was right,” blanche said, adding that fbi agents should never have been armed during the search in the first place. fueled by search warrant documents, the former president falsely claimed that biden had authorized the use of lethal force to “assassinate” him. this misinformation was leveraged in a fundraising campaign sent to supporters claiming that trump was nearly assassinated. the use of deadly force was authorized “only when necessary” during the raid, according to court filings, and is standard language. requesting the gag order, special counsel jack smith said thats “deploying such knowingly false and inflammatory language in the combustible atmosphere that trump has created poses an imminent danger to law enforcement that must be addressed before more violence occurs.” prosecutor david harbach said that trump’s speech should be restricted because it “endangers the safety of others in the community.” harbach read one of trump’s social media posts about the fbi search of mar a lago in 2022, in which trump baselessly said that the fbi was authorized to kill him. “the government is at a loss to conceive why mr. trump would say something so false, so inconceivable, or inviting of violence,” harbach said, adding that trump’s statements are “beyond irresponsible.” “where do you see a call for violence,” cannon asked of the posts. harbach responded that other posts and comments by trump “ultimately result in all types of terrible things,” including threats or harassment of law enforcement. judge aileen cannon indicated monday she is skeptical of placing a gag order on donald trump and asked prosecutors if they wanted to provide more evidence of the former president’s words leading to threats. the hearing is ongoing, and cannon is not expected to rule today. she set a deadline for wednesday for prosecutors to decide whether they want to provide her more evidence in the record around the gag order issue. prosecutor david harbach said the justice department will tell the court by tomorrow. the judge has said she wants to provide both sides “adequate opportunity to respond” each time more evidence about gag orders, threats and other courts’ actions is brought into the florida documents case. the situation highlights how cannon keeps allowing more arguments and information into the case, often putting off making decisions for weeks. judge aileen cannon dressed down prosecutor david harbach twice in 20 minutes, making for tense arguments over the government’s request for a gag order on donald trump. cannon’s treatment of the case overall has been closely watched, as the trump appointed judge has helped the former president repeatedly delay the case. in a tense exchange over protecting law enforcement officers’ identities in the classified documents case, the judge slammed harbach over decorum. harbach appeared to become irritated at questions from cannon who pressed the prosecutor to connect former president donald trump’s words to threats from others against law enforcement. cannon quickly stopped harbach, telling him “i don’t appreciate your tone.” she added that she would “appreciate decorum at all times” and added “if you aren’t able to do that, i’m sure one of your colleagues can take up arguing this motion.” “yes, your honor,” harbach replied. “let’s reset,” the judge said. as the gag order hearing gets underway, prosecutors are arguing that changing donald trump’s release conditions to limit his speech about law enforcement in the classified documents case would be constitutional. ensuring safety of the community “takes it out of the land of first amendment concerns,” prosecutor david harbach told judge aileen cannon on monday afternoon. harbach repeatedly mentioned to cannon how trump supporters’ threats, harassment and attacks on officials might be curtailed if trump’s speech was limited by the judge. the prosecutor is also citing the court’s own authority to protect the community and control a defendant   even trump   when he is awaiting trial from outside a jail cell. judge aileen cannon’s two hour hearing monday morning for donald trump’s criminal case on classified documents became a close read of past special prosecutors and their funding, in the latest attempt from trump’s team to invalidate the case against him. here are key things to know: tough questions for justice department: though the judge was careful to say her questions shouldn’t imply she was leaning one way, cannon pushed justice department attorney james pearce to explain how much money the department has used for its work in the trump criminal cases. the judge noted that even if the office discloses its spending publicly every six months, a financial disclosure that would encompass last fall through this march was overdue. she also sought from prosecutors guidance on explaining the laws and regulations that governed past special prosecutors, at one point bringing up watergate and the era of janet reno as attorney general. cannon’s questions were so pointed toward pearce, at one point the prosecutor mentioned how other courts have been overturned if they invalidated a government function in the way cannon was probing, and said he hoped the justice department could provide additional written argument to the court if invalidating smith was a serious possibility. should congress be more involved? trump is also aiming to bring congress into the conversation. trump attorney emil bove advocated at monday’s hearing that cannon should insist on more congressional oversight of the special counsel’s office’s work, or decide that the way the office is funded is unlawful because, he says, the money is being used in a way congress hadn’t authorized. the argument is in line with other arguments the trump team has made to the judge in recent days alleging smith is too independent from justice department leadership. bove also told the judge more congressional oversight would curb what he called “extraordinary things” that were happening in the documents case.​ justice department attorneys have responded in court that the special counsel operates in line with established policies, in place over several decades and administrations, and that the doj is committed to continuing to fund this prosecution of trump under the attorney general’s authorization. republicans on capitol hill have also tried to buckle down on the doj’s use of the special counsel’s office and its funding. delay, delay, delay: as the case proceeds, slowly, trump’s lawyers are using every opportunity they spot in recent weeks to request additional hearings and oversight suggesting as much to cannon at a hearing on friday and again on monday morning. prosecutors on the federal classified documents case, in stark and terse terms, put forward last week their case for a new gag order against donald trump in an effort to limit what he can say about agents involved in a search of mar a lago in 2022. at 3 p.m. et today, district judge aileen cannon will hold a hearing for both parties to present their arguments over the proposed gag order, and tensions could quickly rise. citing trump’s continued mischaracterization of the fbi’s policy in place around the use of deadly force during the search, prosecutors say trump’s false claims that he narrowly escaped death from federal agents could lead to threats and harassment against them. trump was in new york when agents searched the florida estate. to support this concern, prosecutors, in a filing friday, cited two examples of the type of threats and violence they believe could result from trump’s comments. “shortly after the execution of the search warrant at mar a lago, one of trump’s supporters carried out an armed attack on an fbi office in the wake of trump’s truth social statements regarding the search,” prosecutors wrote. “and just last week, a supporter of trump called an fbi agent associated with the hunter biden case and claimed that, if trump wins reelection, fbi agents will be thrown in jail; and if he does not win, the agents will be ‘hunt[ed] down’ and ‘slaughter[ed]’ in their own homes, after which ‘[w]e’re going to slaughter your whole f****** family.’” trump’s attorneys have called the proposed gag order a direct attack on trump’s first amendment rights and say prosecutors have not given an example of agents being harassed as a result of his recent comments. two federal judges in south florida urged district judge aileen cannon to forgo overseeing the criminal prosecution of former president donald trump when she was first assigned the classified documents case in 2023, according to a report from the new york times last week. the judges, one of whom was the district’s chief judge cecilia m. altonaga, suggested cannon decline to oversee the case brought by special counsel jack smith and allow another judge to govern the case, the times wrote, citing two people briefed on the conversations. cannon is still overseeing the case, which has seen a multitude of delays and increasing scrutiny. altonaga’s chambers declined to comment on the report to cnn. the times did not identify the second judge who reportedly contacted cannon. at the time cannon was assigned the high profile criminal case, she had already faced public backlash   and a major reversal by an appeals court   over her handling of the lawsuit trump brought challenging the fbi’s search of his mar a lago residence in august 2022, when agents found hundreds of classified documents scattered about the property. since then, cannon has repeatedly raised eyebrows among legal scholars for her approach. critics of the judge say that she has slowed the pace of the case to a near standstill, making a pre election trial essentially out of reach. read more about judge cannon here. if judge aileen cannon were to grant the prosecutors’ request for a gag order, it would be the third that donald trump has been subject to during his criminal proceedings. in his new york hush money criminal trial, trump was placed under a gag order by judge juan merchan that barred the former president from discussing witnesses, jurors, prosecutors, court staff and relatives of the district attorney. trump repeatedly reposted content that directly attacked michael cohen and others involved in the trial. he also publicly criticized the jury. over the course of the trial, merchan found trump in contempt for 10 of these violations, resulting in a fine of $10,000. this gag order is still in effect. trump argued that the gag order was a violation of his first amendment right to free speech   an argument that legal experts said had no merit as they are commonly used in criminal prosecutions to protect the integrity of the proceedings. trump is also under a gag order in his federal election interference case. judge tanya chutkan imposed a narrow order barring trump from making comments about prosecutors, court staff and potential witnesses after a series of comments trump posted on social media. the second hearing of the day in fort pierce, florida, will begin at 3 p.m. et, and attorneys will argue over a potential gag order for the former president. donald trump’s attorney emil bove previewed his arguments at the end of the morning session, saying the proposed gag order is a “truly extraordinary” effort to limit trump’s speech at debates and on the campaign trail. the first debate between trump and president joe biden is thursday on cnn. the justice department has said politics is not a consideration in its gag order request. bove also questioned whether attorney general merrick garland authorized the gag order request. trump’s attorney emil bove said that the justice department’s appointment of special counsels needs “more oversight from congress,” and urged judge aileen cannon that congressional oversight would curb what he called the “extraordinary things that are happening” in the classified documents case. bove also said that, should cannon say that the justice department must fund smith’s office on its own, as a prosecutor suggested it might do, it would “highlight a separation of powers issue.” donald trump’s legal team has consistently filed motion after motion in attempt to delay criminal proceedings against the former president. these delays have become a central component of trump’s legal strategy   one that district judge aileen cannon has been receptive to, hence today’s hearing. in new york: days before the trial began in the criminal hush money case, trump’s legal team filed several unsuccessful motions attempting to delay the proceedings, including one asking the judge to recuse himself due to his daughter’s political activity. in washington: in the federal case accusing trump of attempting to overturn the 2020 election results, trump’s team was able to ask the supreme court to give trump complete immunity from prosecution on all actions he has taken as president. as a result, all proceedings in this case have been delayed until the court makes its decision, which is expected this week. in fulton county: in his atlanta based case, the defense has employed similar delay strategies, focusing on district attorney fani willis’s relationship with lead prosecutor nathan wade   a relationship that trump’s team has argued should disqualify willis. prosecutor james pearce told judge aileen cannon that should she find that special counsel jack smith was improperly funded, the justice department is prepared to fund smith’s office by itself. “the department of justice, at least in the 2023 appropriations cycle, (has) over $1 billion,” pearce said. “it is the full commitment of the department of justice” to fund “this prosecution,” he said. cannon has pressed prosecutors over the limitless nature of funding for smith. “i think there is a separation of powers concern,” she said, when there is no cap on funding. during this line of questioning, cannon told pearce that she was not “indicating anything” by asking about alternative funding routes, but rather to “cover the scope of what’s being briefed here.” judge aileen cannon is asking very specific questions as she walks attorneys through granular details of the historic laws that have governed previous special counsel investigations. her questions are focused on the constitution’s appropriations clause and on a law passed in the wake of the watergate scandal called the ethics in government act. in his arguments against the way special counsel jack smith is being funded, donald trump’s attorney emil bove argued smith’s office has been in violation of funding statutes “from its inception.” “there’s not a valid appropriations that validates what’s going on here.” bove said. judge aileen cannon, who had detailed questions for bove during his oral arguments, asked at one point: “is there any cap to the funding?” “no,” bove said, adding that was part of the reason the court should be “wary” of the way smith’s office is funded. as donald trump’s attorneys argue that special counsel jack smith’s funding violates the us constitution, his republican allies in the house are waging a similar battle. in a june 3 letter to oklahoma republican rep. tom cole, head of the house appropriations committee that controls much of congress’s spending powers, republican rep. jim jordan of ohio called for the elimination of funding from “politicized prosecutions.” jordan chairs the house’s subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government and has repeatedly criticized the cases brought against trump, claiming that they are politically motivated and masterminded by the biden administration. (there is no evidence that the president has been involved in any criminal proceeding against trump.) in his letter, jordan also endorsed a bill that would “authorize removal of an action or prosecution against a president, vice president, former president, or former vice president.” as the house convenes this week, lawmakers are set to consider various appropriations bills, including funding for the justice department. while cole has previously called the guilty verdict in trump’s criminal hush money trial “a sad example of political gamesmanship,” it is unclear whether he will support such measures to eliminate funding. the hearing about whether special counsel jack smith is lawfully funded in the classified documents case has begun. smith is in the courtroom for the arguments in front of judge aileen cannon. he is joined by prosecutors jay bratt and james pearce. lawyers for former president donald trump, walt nauta and carlos de oliveira, are also in the courtroom. the three defendants were not required to attend today’s proceedings. attorneys for donald trump will continue their legal efforts to throw off special counsel jack smith and the classified documents case against the former president in florida on monday. trump’s attorneys will battle prosecutors in court on the second part of trump’s argument that smith’s appointment was illegitimate, focusing on how he’s being funded. on friday, prosecutors, defense attorneys and third parties fought over whether smith was legitimately appointed as special counsel, an argument district judge aileen cannon seemed skeptical of during the hearing. “president biden’s doj is paying for this politically motivated prosecution of biden’s chief political rival ‘off the books,’ without accountability or authorization,” trump’s attorneys argued in their filing earlier this year. “rather than funding the special counsel’s office through the ordinary budget process, jack smith is drawing on a permanent indefinite appropriation.” trump’s attorneys say that the way smith is being funded is in violation of the appropriations clause of the us constitution because it’s not part of the justice department’s budget. “special counsel expenditures have not become part of the department’s budget and, as here, continue to be funded through the permanent indefinite appropriation reserved for ‘independent counsels,’” his attorneys wrote. prosecutors say trump’s reasoning is “unsound” and that the attorney general “has exclusive authority (except as otherwise provided by law) to direct ‘the conduct of litigation’ on behalf of the united states.” “the special counsel’s investigation is lawfully funded through an appropriation that has been used repeatedly to pay similar special and independent counsels,” prosecutors wrote, “and the lawfulness of this practice is confirmed by statutory text, history, and longstanding practice (including funding for a special counsel appointed during trump’s administration).” judge aileen cannon has released the schedule for the tuesday hearings in the mar a lago classified documents case: 11 a.m. et: a closed door, confidential hearing with the defense lawyers and the special counsel’s office. the hearing will cover sealed matters, including secret grand jury information 1 p.m. et: a public hearing for trump and his co defendants to challenge evidence used in the classified documents indictment the afternoon hearing will address trump’s alleged attempts to throw out evidence seized in the fbi search of mar a lago in 2022, such as boxes of classified records that trump is accused of mishandling and attempting to obstruct federal authorities from recovering after his presidency. trump has pleaded not guilty. the judge will also discuss the testimony and evidence prosecutors collected from trump’s former lawyers that helped to build the obstruction case against him   the type of information that a washington, dc based judge ordered the attorneys to provide to the grand jury before trump was charged. trump’s lawyers are trying to convince cannon that interactions between trump and his then primary attorney evan corcoran before the mar a lago search shouldn’t have been allowed to become part of the case. donald trump was found guilty in may 2024 on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the hush money trial in manhattan criminal court. trump became the first former president in us history to be convicted of a felony, and with his third presidential bid under way for 2024, the stakes are high for both him and the country. catch up on what you need to know about trump’s four cases: here’s a recap of each case: track the criminal cases against trump. © 2025 cable news network. a warner bros. discovery company. all rights reserved. cnn sans ™ & © 2016 cable news network.

supported by judge aileen m. cannon said prosecutors should not be allowed to share the report outside the justice department, adding that it contained information that had not been made public. by alan feuer the decision by judge aileen m. cannon not to issue an immediate ruling raised the possibility that president elect donald j. trump would take office in the meantime and have power over the report’s release. by alan feuer and david c. adams the justice department now enters a second trump administration with less authority to pursue a president than it has had in half a century. by devlin barrett, charlie savage and alan feuer judge aileen m. cannon, who dismissed the classified documents case, blocked a volume about that matter from being shown to congress but allowed the release of a volume about the election case. by alan feuer and charlie savage the judges left in place a lower court injunction that bars the disclosure of the report for three days, and the justice department then appealed it. by charlie savage and alan feuer but in a court filing, the department indicated that it would release a separate report about donald j. trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election as soon as possible. by alan feuer and charlie savage judge aileen m. cannon, a trump appointee who had dismissed the documents case in its entirety, temporarily barred the justice department from releasing jack smith’s account of his investigation. by alan feuer and charlie savage both the justice department and the judge who oversaw the case were asked to stop the public release of the report. by alan feuer the special counsel asked for time to assess how to proceed now that donald trump is returning the white house, triggering a justice department policy against prosecuting a sitting president. by devlin barrett and alan feuer the man accused of plotting to shoot donald j. trump at his golf course had asked the judge to step aside, saying she had been praised by the former president and listed as a possible trump appointee. by alan feuer lawyers for ryan routh want judge aileen cannon to remove herself from the case after a report that her name was among those who could be appointed to a top legal position if donald trump is elected. by alan feuer and maggie haberman the plea from the man accused of mounting an assassination attempt against former president donald j. trump came at a hearing that lasted less than five minutes. by patricia mazzei the new federal indictment in florida comes on top of two gun charges against ryan w. routh, an itinerant contractor with an extensive criminal record. by glenn thrush en una publicación en redes sociales, el expresidente donald trump escribió “cuando gane, esas personas que hicieron trampa serán procesadas con todo el peso de la ley”. by maggie haberman in a social media post on saturday, former president donald j. trump wrote that “when i win, those people that cheated will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.” by maggie haberman after legal setbacks and long delays, jack smith, the special counsel, is signaling that he will pursue both the classified documents and election cases through the homestretch of the presidential campaign. by alan feuer the special counsel, jack smith, argued that judge aileen cannon had erred in throwing out charges against donald trump of improperly holding national security secrets after leaving office. by alan feuer mr. biden’s legal team pointed to a decision by a federal judge in florida, who ruled that the special counsel in mr. trump’s case, jack smith, had been unconstitutionally appointed. by glenn thrush judge aileen cannon’s move to throw out the case against former president donald j. trump could have far reaching implications. by sabrina tavernise, alan feuer, nina feldman, will reid, asthaa chaturvedi, marc georges, paige cowett, rowan niemisto, dan powell, elisheba ittoop, diane wong and alyssa moxley the effort to hold donald trump to account has already yielded a supreme court decision giving former presidents broad immunity. now another case could make prosecuting political figures more complicated. by alan feuer los fallos a lo largo de todo el proceso han alimentado preguntas sobre el favoritismo de la jueza, su experiencia profesional y su perspicacia legal. by alan feuer and eileen sullivan a federal judge on monday dismissed in its entirety the classified documents case against former president donald j. trump, ruling that the appointment of the special counsel, jack smith, had violated the constitution. the ruling by judge aileen m. cannon, who was put on the bench by mr. trump, differed from previous court decisions reaching back to the watergate era. alan feuer, a reporter for the new york times who is covering federal criminal cases involving mr. trump, explains the ruling. by alan feuer, gabriel blanco, alexandra ostasiewicz, karen hanley and laura salaberry judge aileen cannon’s rulings in the documents case had fueled questions about favoritism and legal acumen even before she threw out the charges that donald trump had mishandled classified documents. by alan feuer and eileen sullivan her decision rejected what the supreme court said in its landmark ruling in 1974. by charlie savage before she was assigned donald j. trump’s classified documents case, she had little experience with criminal trials, and her impartiality came into question early on. by eileen sullivan judge cannon has shown a willingness to grant a serious audience to some of the former president’s most far fetched defense claims. by alan feuer judge aileen cannon ruled that the entire case should be thrown out because the appointment of the special counsel who brought the case, jack smith, had violated the constitution. mr. smith’s office said he would appeal. by alan feuer walt nauta, a personal aide to former president donald j. trump, claimed that he was the victim of vindictive prosecution in the classified documents case. by alan feuer the postponement was likely to cause only minor delays to the case, which has already slowed to a crawl with judge aileen cannon’s previous decisions. by alan feuer the former president’s lawyers asked to freeze nearly all proceedings while they sort out whether the supreme court decision applies to charges focused on actions after he left the white house. by alan feuer judge aileen cannon said she intended to review a hugely consequential legal victory that prosecutors won last year and that served as a cornerstone of the obstruction charges against donald trump. even though another federal court has ruled on the matter, judge aileen cannon said she would hold a hearing to determine whether prosecutors can use information from one of the former president’s lawyers. by alan feuer judge aileen m. cannon appeared to all but dismiss a request from former president donald j. trump’s legal team to suppress evidence from the search of mar a lago. by alan feuer and eileen sullivan judge aileen cannon posed tough questions to prosecutors who want to bar the former president from making inflammatory remarks about the agents who searched mar a lago in the documents case. by alan feuer and eileen sullivan judge aileen cannon held a hearing to consider a question that has been quickly dismissed in other cases: whether there is a constitutional basis for the appointment of a special counsel. by eileen sullivan judge aileen cannon has repeatedly proven willing to hear out even far fetched arguments from the former president’s legal team, including a challenge to the appointment of the special counsel, jack smith. by alan feuer and eileen sullivan two federal judges in south florida privately urged aileen m. cannon to decline the case when it was assigned to her last year, according to two people briefed on the matter. she chose to keep it. by charlie savage and alan feuer in a filing, the lawyers in the classified documents case made an aggressive, and at times misleading, argument against prosecutors’ request for the judge to curb his attacks on agents. by alan feuer judge aileen cannon threw out one basis for the case against the former president, involving a highly sensitive military map he showed an aide after leaving office. by alan feuer the new schedule set by judge aileen cannon reflects the array of legal issues that she has yet to resolve amid efforts by the former president’s legal team to delay the trial. by alan feuer the former president’s lies about the f.b.i. being prepared to kill him during the search of mar a lago took his attacks on the justice system and the rule of law to another level. by alan feuer after former president donald j. trump was found guilty, he and a number of conservative figures in the news media and lawmakers on the right have spread false and misleading claims about the manhattan case. by linda qiu judge aileen cannon’s handling of court hearings offers insights into how the case accusing donald trump of illegally retaining classified material has become bogged down in unresolved issues. by alan feuer the decision was made on procedural grounds and left open the possibility that federal prosecutors could try again to restrict donald trump from making statements that could endanger f.b.i. agents. by alan feuer the latest battle over what the former president can say about a continuing legal case came after he falsely suggested that f.b.i. agents were authorized to shoot him when they searched mar a lago. by alan feuer the prosecutors said the former president had made “grossly misleading” assertions about the f.b.i.’s search of mar a lago that could endanger the agents involved. by alan feuer a prosecutor got into a heated exchange with judge aileen cannon over a minor point, as the case continues to crawl. by alan feuer prosecutors vehemently denied the accusations in newly unsealed motions that show how the former president’s defense team has used often baseless assertions to undercut the indictment. by alan feuer judge aileen cannon has given sober consideration to arguments that some experts say should have been promptly dispensed with, leaving a backlog of pretrial issues without a trial date in sight. by alan feuer judge aileen cannon had previously made clear that the trial would not start as scheduled this month but she declined to set a new timetable, saying many pretrial issues still have to be resolved. by alan feuer the porn star at the center of donald trump’s criminal trial testified, at times in graphic detail, about the sexual encounter she said she had with trump in 2006. by jesse mckinley judge aileen m. cannon did not immediately set a new date, but the delay increases the chance that the trial will not happen before the november election. by alan feuer “don’t give them a noble reason to indict you, because they will,” an unnamed associate told donald j. trump, according to an interview the person gave the f.b.i. in the classified documents case. by alan feuer judge aileen m. cannon denied requests by walt nauta and carlos de oliveira to have the charges against them dropped. by alan feuer the judge did not rule on motions by lawyers for walt nauta and carlos de oliveira, who are accused of helping the former president obstruct government efforts to recover classified material. by eileen sullivan walt nauta and carlos de oliveira, who still work for the former president, will be in federal court in florida on friday asking a judge to throw out charges that they helped obstruct the investigation. by alan feuer and eileen sullivan the special counsel had asked that the names of about two dozen government witnesses be redacted from a public version of a court filing to protect against potential threats or harassment. by alan feuer la jueza aileen cannon dictaminó que el expresidente no puede eludir el proceso argumentando que la ley de registros presidenciales le permitía reclamar material gubernamental secreto como suyo. by alan feuer the judge in the documents case rejected for now donald trump’s central argument to escape prosecution. by alan feuer and maggie haberman judge aileen cannon ruled that the former president cannot escape prosecution by arguing that the presidential records act allowed him to claim secret government material as his own property. by alan feuer the push for a quick decision on one of the former president’s most far fetched claims is an unusual and risky move in a case judge aileen cannon has allowed to become bogged down. by alan feuer civil cases are keeping the pressure on donald trump ahead of his four criminal trials. by maggie haberman, alan feuer and ben protess aileen cannon has yet to set a trial date in the complex case accusing donald j. trump of mishandling classified materials, and has stirred confusion with some decisions. by alan feuer all four criminal cases against donald trump have become mired in issues that have pushed back the start of trials. by alan feuer and maggie haberman with the former president in attendance, judge aileen cannon held a hearing in federal court in florida to weigh some of donald trump’s motions to have the classified documents case dismissed. by alan feuer the special counsel, jack smith, filed an array of rebuttals to motions by former president donald j. trump to dismiss his documents case. by charlie savage and alan feuer judge aileen cannon previously indicated that she would push back the start of the proceeding from the initially planned date in may. prosecutors want to begin in july, and the former president in august. by alan feuer, maggie haberman and eileen sullivan the supreme court’s decision to weigh immunity claims means a trial on election interference charges can’t start for months. by alan feuer and maggie haberman after previously seeking to have the proceeding postponed until after the election, the former president’s lawyers unexpectedly said he could live with a date over the summer. by alan feuer and maggie haberman jack smith, the special counsel, said in a court filing that never before had a former official “engaged in conduct remotely similar to trump’s.” by alan feuer aileen cannon is facing a series of tests in the classified documents case. by alan feuer and maggie haberman the former president showed up at the federal courthouse in fort pierce, fla., where his lawyers argued behind closed doors in a proceeding about what evidence the prosecution has to share. by eileen sullivan the move to shield the identities of several witnesses suggested a mounting sense of frustration with judge aileen m. cannon, who is overseeing the case. by alan feuer the office of the special counsel, jack smith, pushed back on the former president’s assertions that his prosecution was motivated by animosity toward him in intelligence agencies. by alan feuer court papers filed by his lawyers, formally a request for discovery evidence, sounded at times more like political talking points. by alan feuer the former president’s lawyers may question whether the documents he took from the white house were related to national defense and whether the country’s security was damaged. by alan feuer judge aileen m. cannon said she would meet with prosecutors and defense lawyers in march to settle on a schedule for the former president’s trial in federal court in florida. by alan feuer responding to a request from the former president’s lawyers, judge aileen cannon said she could make “reasonable adjustments” to the timetable for the trial, which is scheduled to start in may. by alan feuer a hearing brought to an apparent end the back and forth over whether a co defendant in the classified documents case, walt nauta, understood that his lawyer might have conflicts. by eileen sullivan judge aileen cannon postponed a hearing on a government request involving a lawyer for one of the former president’s co defendants. she said prosecutors were wasting her time. by maggie haberman the former president’s lawyers said his trial on charges of mishandling classified information should be delayed from its planned start in may because of problems gaining access to all the evidence. by alan feuer prosecutors said the former president’s defense team was trying to use an arcane law to derail the scheduled start of his trial on charges of mishandling classified material and obstructing justice. by alan feuer judge aileen cannon’s order did not specify where the former president could discuss the classified material but suggested it should not be mar a lago. by alan feuer federal prosecutors described the shift in a court filing that highlighted conflicts of interest in the overlapping legal representation of witnesses and defendants in the case. by maggie haberman and alan feuer an assessment of the four indictments against the former president, including notable features, strengths and weaknesses. by charlie savage trials in two criminal cases involving the former president are already scheduled, and prosecutors are seeking dates for two more, all falling in the first half of 2024. by maggie astor the arguments in the classified documents case stem from the government’s attempts to put a protective order in place governing the handling of a trove of discovery materials. by alan feuer lawyers for the former president proposed using “a previously approved facility at or near his residence”   presumably mar a lago   instead of a secure location run by the federal courts. by alan feuer prosecutors questioned whether stanley woodward jr. could defend walt nauta while also representing trump employees who might take the stand against mr. nauta. by glenn thrush and alan feuer a judge with a liberal background and significant criminal trial experience, tanya s. chutkan swiftly ruled against the former president in his 2021 attempt to keep white house papers secret from the congressional inquiry. by charlie savage and alan feuer judge aileen m. cannon’s ruling to start the trump documents trial in may 2024 showed, for now, that she is the jurist defenders have described: level headed and not beholden to the man who appointed her. by robert draper judge aileen m. cannon rejected former president donald j. trump’s request to delay the trial until after the election but pushed the start date past the justice department’s request to begin in december. by alan feuer in the first hearing before judge aileen m. cannon, the two sides sparred over a trial date and how to prosecute a former president and current candidate. by alan feuer the office of the special counsel, jack smith, said there “is no basis in law or fact” for granting a motion from former president donald j. trump that could push the start of the trial until after election day. by alan feuer the former president’s legal team argued in a court filing that no trial date should be set until all “substantive motions” in the case were resolved, setting up an early key decision by judge aileen m. cannon. by alan feuer and maggie haberman the order by judge aileen cannon means the identities of some or all of the justice department’s 84 potential witnesses in the case against the former president could become public. by alan feuer if judge aileen cannon sticks to her initial decision to hold the trial in fort pierce, fla., the jury would be drawn largely from counties that donald trump won handily in his previous campaigns. by maggie haberman, jonathan swan and alan feuer the judge, aileen m. cannon, set an aggressive schedule for moving the case forward, though the proceedings are likely to be delayed by pretrial clashes. by alan feuer, maggie haberman and charlie savage the role of secret evidence at public trials is expected to raise a series of tricky legal issues and logistical hurdles. here’s a closer look. by charlie savage court papers from federal prosecutors in the case against donald trump suggested that other criminal cases could potentially emerge from the inquiry. by alan feuer

copyright 2025 the associated press. all rights reserved. file   republican presidential candidate former president donald trump speaks at a campaign rally, june 22, 2024, at temple university in philadelphia. the federal judge presiding over trump’s classified documents prosecution is hearing arguments monday, june 24, on whether to bar him from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. special counsel jack smith’s team says the restrictions are necessary in light of trump’s false comments that the fbi agents who searched his mar a lago estate for classified documents were out to kill him and his family. (ap photo/chris szagola, file) in this image from video provided by the u.s. senate, aileen m. cannon speaks remotely during a senate judiciary committee oversight nomination hearing on july 29, 2020, in washington. cannon, the federal judge presiding over the classified documents prosecution of donald trump, is hearing arguments monday, june 24, 2024, on whether to bar the former president from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. (u.s. senate via ap) file   special counsel jack smith speaks to the media about an indictment of former president donald trump, aug. 1, 2023, in washington. the federal judge presiding over trump’s classified documents prosecution is hearing arguments monday, june 24, 2024, on whether to bar the former president from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. smith’s team says the restrictions are necessary in light of trump’s false comments that the fbi agents who searched his mar a lago estate were out to kill him and his family. (ap photo/j. scott applewhite, file) file   republican presidential candidate former president donald trump speaks at a campaign rally, june 22, 2024, at temple university in philadelphia. the federal judge presiding over trump’s classified documents prosecution is hearing arguments monday, june 24, on whether to bar him from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. special counsel jack smith’s team says the restrictions are necessary in light of trump’s false comments that the fbi agents who searched his mar a lago estate for classified documents were out to kill him and his family. (ap photo/chris szagola, file) file   republican presidential candidate former president donald trump speaks at a campaign rally, june 22, 2024, at temple university in philadelphia. the federal judge presiding over trump’s classified documents prosecution is hearing arguments monday, june 24, on whether to bar him from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. special counsel jack smith’s team says the restrictions are necessary in light of trump’s false comments that the fbi agents who searched his mar a lago estate for classified documents were out to kill him and his family. (ap photo/chris szagola, file) in this image from video provided by the u.s. senate, aileen m. cannon speaks remotely during a senate judiciary committee oversight nomination hearing on july 29, 2020, in washington. cannon, the federal judge presiding over the classified documents prosecution of donald trump, is hearing arguments monday, june 24, 2024, on whether to bar the former president from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. (u.s. senate via ap) in this image from video provided by the u.s. senate, aileen m. cannon speaks remotely during a senate judiciary committee oversight nomination hearing on july 29, 2020, in washington. cannon, the federal judge presiding over the classified documents prosecution of donald trump, is hearing arguments monday, june 24, 2024, on whether to bar the former president from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. (u.s. senate via ap) file   special counsel jack smith speaks to the media about an indictment of former president donald trump, aug. 1, 2023, in washington. the federal judge presiding over trump’s classified documents prosecution is hearing arguments monday, june 24, 2024, on whether to bar the former president from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. smith’s team says the restrictions are necessary in light of trump’s false comments that the fbi agents who searched his mar a lago estate were out to kill him and his family. (ap photo/j. scott applewhite, file) file   special counsel jack smith speaks to the media about an indictment of former president donald trump, aug. 1, 2023, in washington. the federal judge presiding over trump’s classified documents prosecution is hearing arguments monday, june 24, 2024, on whether to bar the former president from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. smith’s team says the restrictions are necessary in light of trump’s false comments that the fbi agents who searched his mar a lago estate were out to kill him and his family. (ap photo/j. scott applewhite, file) fort pierce, fla. (ap)   a federal prosecutor in the classified documents case of donald trump clashed with the judge monday as he faced skeptical questioning over a request to bar the former president from making threatening comments about law enforcement agents involved in the investigation. special counsel jack smith’s team is seeking to make as a condition of trump’s freedom pending trial a prohibition on remarks that could endanger fbi agents participating in the case. prosecutors say those restrictions are necessary after trump falsely claimed last month that the fbi was prepared to kill him when it searched his florida estate, mar a lago, for classified documents two years ago. but prosecutor david harbach, a member of smith’s team, encountered immediate pushback from u.s. district judge aileen cannon, a trump appointee whose handling of the case has generated intense scrutiny and has contributed to delays that make a trial before the november presidential election a virtual impossibility. the judge questioned harbach about how she could fashion an order that did not run afoul of trump’s free speech rights, whether fbi agents were sufficiently protected if their names were withheld from court documents and how prosecutors could prove a direct link between trump’s comments and any resulting harm to the public. “i’m trying to make sure that whatever condition is contemplated is consistent with the first amendment,” she said, later adding that there needs to be a connection “between the alleged dangerous comments and the risk” to public safety. at one point, as harbach tried despite frequent interruptions from cannon to rattle off the multiple rationales that he said existed for speech restrictions on trump, the visibly exasperated prosecutor noted acidly that “i’ve got one reason out so far.” the comment drew a rebuke from cannon, who said, “mr. harbach, i don’t appreciate your tone.” she said that if he could not behave in a more professional manner, one of his colleagues could take over instead. harbach went on to complete his arguments and later apologized to the judge, saying he hadn’t meant to be unprofessional. defense lawyer todd blanche disputed the idea that trump’s comments posed an imminent threat to anyone in law enforcement and contended that prosecutors’ request would have a chilling effect. trump is the presumptive republican presidential nominee and is set to debate president joe biden on thursday. trump was not required to be present for the hearing and was not in attendance. trump’s often incendiary rhetoric has carried legal consequences in other cases. the new york judge presiding over trump’s hush money trial, in which he was convicted of 34 felony counts last month, fined him a total of $10,000 for violating a gag order that barred him from verbal attacks on witnesses and jurors. and a federal judge in washington handling his election subversion case imposed a gag order last year that an appeals court later largely upheld but also narrowed. it was not immediately clear when cannon might rule. the arguments were part of a three day hearing that began friday to deal with several of the many unresolved legal issues that have piled up in a case that has been snarled by delays and a plodding pace. cannon indefinitely postponed the trial last month and no new date has been set. trump faces dozens of felony charges accusing him of illegally hoarding top secret records at mar a lago and obstructing the fbi’s efforts to get them back. given the breadth of evidence that prosecutors have put forward, many legal experts have regarded the case as the most straightforward of the four prosecutions against trump, who has pleaded not guilty. but cannon has been slow to rule on numerous motions and has proved willing to entertain defense requests that prosecutors say are meritless. smith’s team objected last month after trump publicly claimed that the fbi was prepared to kill him while executing a court authorized search warrant of mar a lago on aug. 8, 2022. trump was referencing boilerplate language from fbi policy that prohibits the use of deadly force during the execution of search warrants except when the officer conducting the search has a reasonable belief that the “subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.” trump falsely claimed in a fundraising email that the biden administration was “locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.” prosecutors argued that such comments are part of a pattern of trump speech that animates his base against law enforcement, citing as examples an attempted attack on an fbi office in ohio three days after the mar a lago search and the more recent arrest of a trump supporter accused of threatening an fbi agent who investigated biden’s son, hunter. “in our view, they are significant, they are dangerous,” harbach said of the comments. “they present an imminent and foreseeable risk to the fbi agents in the case.” but trump’s lawyers say prosecutors failed to show that his comments have endangered any fbi official who participated in the mar a lago search. they said trump was commenting more generally on his belief that he is the victim of political persecution rather than about any one individual. “it’s an attack on the decision made by his political rival to authorize a search by agents authorized to carry guns,” said blanche, one of trump’s attorneys. the justice department has said biden has had no involvement in the investigation. copyright 2025 the associated press. all rights reserved.

january 11, 2025e paper the hindu on books books of the week, reviews, excerpts, new titles and features. data point decoding the headlines with facts, figures, and numbers first day first show news and reviews from the world of cinema and streaming. health matters ramya kannan writes to you on getting to good health, and staying there the view from india looking at world affairs from the indian perspective. science for all the weekly newsletter from science writers takes the jargon out of science and puts the fun in! karnataka today your daily dose of news highlights from karnataka today's cache your download of the top 5 technology stories of the day. january 11, 2025e paper published   june 24, 2024 11:15 am ist   fort pierce former president and republican candidate donald trump. | photo credit: ap the federal judge presiding over the classified documents prosecution of donald trump is hearing arguments on june 24 on whether to bar the former president from public comments that prosecutors say could endanger the lives of fbi agents working on the case. special counsel jack smith's team says the restrictions are necessary in light of mr. trump's false comments that the fbi agents who searched his mar a lago estate in august 2022 for classified documents were out to kill him and his family. mr. trump's lawyers say any gag order would improperly silence mr. trump in the heat of a presidential campaign in which he is the presumptive republican nominee. it was not immediately clear when u.s. district judge aileen cannon, a mr. trump appointee whose handling of the case has been closely scrutinized, might rule. before turning her attention to the limited gag order sought by prosecutors, she is scheduled to hear additional arguments on june 24 morning related to the justice department's appointment and funding of smith, whose team brought the charges. the arguments are part of a three day hearing that began on june 21 to deal with several of the many unresolved legal issues that have piled up in a case that had been set for trial last month but has been snarled by delays and a plodding pace. ms. cannon indefinitely postponed the trial, and it's all but guaranteed that it will not take place before the november presidential election. mr. trump faces dozens of felony charges accusing him of illegally hoarding top secret records at mar a lago and obstructing the fbi's efforts to get them back. given the breadth of evidence that prosecutors have put forward, many legal experts have regarded the case as the most straightforward of the four prosecutions against trump, who has pleaded not guilty. but ms. cannon has been slow to rule on numerous motions and has proved willing to entertain defense requests that prosecutors say are meritless. mr. smith's team objected last month after mr. trump claimed that the fbi was prepared to kill him while executing a court authorized search warrant of mar a lago on aug. 8, 2022. he was referencing boilerplate language from fbi policy that prohibits the use of deadly force except when the officer searching has a reasonable belief that the “subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or another person.” mr. trump falsely claimed in a fundraising email that the fbi was “locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.” prosecutors say such comments pose a significant foreseeable risk to law enforcement, citing as examples an attempted attack on an fbi office in ohio three days after the mar a lago search and the more recent arrest of a trump supporter accused of threatening an fbi agent who investigated president joe biden's son, hunter. “deploying such knowingly false and inflammatory language in the combustible atmosphere that trump has created poses an imminent danger to law enforcement that must be addressed before more violence occurs,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing on june 21. mr. trump's lawyers say they've failed to show that his comments have directly endangered any fbi official who participated in the mar a lago search. “fundamentally, the motion is based on the fact that president trump criticized the mar a lago raid based on evidence from publicly filed motions in this case, as part of his constitutionally protected campaign speech, in a manner that someone in the government disagreed with and does not like,” they said. published   june 24, 2024 11:15 am ist world / usa copyright© 2025, thg publishing pvt ltd. or its affiliated companies. all rights reserved. back to top comments have to be in english, and in full sentences. they cannot be abusive or personal. please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments. we have migrated to a new commenting platform. if you are already a registered user of the hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. if you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on vuukle.
supported by judge aileen cannon posed tough questions to prosecutors who want to bar the former president from making inflammatory remarks about the agents who searched mar a lago in the documents case. by alan feuer and eileen sullivan reporting from the federal courthouse in fort pierce, fla. the federal judge overseeing former president donald j. trump’s classified documents case posed tough questions on monday to prosecutors who have asked her to bar him from making inflammatory statements that might endanger any f.b.i. agents involved in the case. at a contentious hearing in federal district court in fort pierce, fla., the judge, aileen m. cannon, seemed disinclined to impose new conditions on mr. trump that would limit what he could say about the f.b.i. prosecutors had asked for the restrictions last month after mr. trump made blatantly false statements, claiming that federal agents were “locked & loaded ready to take me out” when they carried out a search two years ago at mar a lago, his private club and residence in florida. the court authorized search was a crucial element of the government’s investigation, leading to the discovery of more than 100 classified documents that mr. trump kept after leaving office. the hearing was the latest clash between mr. trump’s lawyers and prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, jack smith. it centered on a knotty issue that has now cropped up in several of the former president’s legal cases: how to balance mr. trump’s right to attack the government   even falsely   against shielding the participants in the cases from threats of violence or harassment inspired by his incendiary remarks. judge cannon put off answering that question for the moment, declining to join the other judges who have put restrictions on mr. trump’s speech in two of his criminal cases   in washington and new york   and during his civil fraud trial in manhattan. but she expressed skepticism about the mechanism prosecutors want to use to curb mr. trump’s remarks in florida.

 aileen cannon also expresses doubts about changes to stop trump from making remarks that could endanger agents the federal judge overseeing donald trump’s prosecution for retaining classified documents expressed deep reservations on monday with modifying the former president’s bail conditions to prevent him from making statements that could endanger fbi agents, suggesting redacting their names in filings was enough. the us district judge aileen cannon also reprimanded david harbach, the prosecutor arguing on behalf of the special counsel, saying at one point she did not appreciate his tone as he became increasingly frustrated at being interrupted by the judge’s questions. the hearing in federal district court in fort pierce, florida, was a particularly bruising day for prosecutors as the judge expressed skepticism at needing to change trump’s bail conditions at this juncture   and then questioned the strength of their evidence. the latest dispute over trump’s inflammatory statements stems from his blatantly false characterization of the fbi’s lethal force policy when they executed a court authorized search warrant at the mar a lago club in august 2022 and retrieved more than 100 classified documents. the order, which limits fbi agents to use deadly force only if they face extreme danger and became public after the fbi’s operational plan for the search was unsealed, used standard language that is routinely used in hundreds of warrants executed across the country. but trump and some allies twisted the limiting language to claim the fbi was authorized by the biden administration to shoot him when they searched mar a lago, even though trump was not there during the search and the language is standard us justice department policy. “crooked joe biden’s doj, in their illegal and unconstitutional raid of mar a lago, authorized the fbi to use deadly (lethal) force. now we know, for sure, that joe biden is a serious threat to democracy. he is mentally unfit to hold office   25th amendment!” trump wrote in a social media post last month.